category	name	content	utterance	Title	Speaker_name	Summary	From	To	House	Term	Subcorpus	Speaker_role	Speaker_type	Speaker_party	Speaker_party_name	Party_status	Speaker_gender
2019 2020	string	string	string	string	string	string	time	time	Lower\ house Upper\ house	continuous	COVID Reference	discrete	discrete	A BI CB CON CON;I CON;NA DUP I I;LD IGC LAB LD LD;NA LI PC SNP	Alliance Bishops Conservative Conservative;Independent Conservative;Non-affiliated Crossbench Democratic\ Unionist\ Party Independent Independent;Liberal\ Democrat Labour Labour\ Independent Liberal\ Democrat Liberal\ Democrat;Non-affiliated Non-affiliated Plaid\ Cymru Scottish\ National\ Party The\ Independent\ Group\ for\ Change	discrete	F M
class	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta title=True	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta	meta
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons	I can reassure my right hon. Friend that there will be no mission creep. This is a UN mission and our role is confined to that. I cannot, however, tell him that it is limited to logistical and technical involvement. This specialist reconnaissance force has been committed to MINUSMA precisely to provide an ability to understand where the threat is and to deliver a population-centric peacekeeping mission. This is time-limited and necessary. I accept that there is no obvious UK interest in Mali itself, but there is a great deal to be said for being there: first, because the humanitarian situation requires it; and, secondly, because the Sahel is a huge space on Europe’s southern flank in which violence is flourishing, and it is in the interests neither of countries in Europe nor of countries in coastal west Africa, where the UK has more obvious interests, that we do not work against the violence in the Sahel, but see it exported to places where the UK has more obvious interests Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, 4 June).	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons.u289	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-09	Heappey, James Stephen	Limited UK involvement in Mali	2020-12-09 00:00:00	2020-12-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	I thank both the Leader of the House and the shadow Leader of the House for their kind words over recent weeks about my tandem skydive for local charity. I would also like to express my gratitude to the brilliant tandem instructor at Black Knights, Lee Rhodes, for safely delivering me back to earth without the need for a Denton and Reddish by-election. I did the jump for Florence, a six-year-old girl with a very rare life-limiting genetic disorder called GM1. Can the Leader of the House help find time for either a statement or a debate on GM1 and other extremely rare genetic conditions to help raise awareness across the House?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u185	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Gwynne, Andrew John	Request debate on rare genetic disorders	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. As you will recall, on Saturday afternoon, I was the Member who made the point that the Leader of the House should have been making an emergency business statement at that time, rather than relying on the device of a point of order to try to change the business today. I described it at the time as “low-rent jiggery-pokery”. It is not time that the Government, instead of playing games with the business of the House, actually subscribed to the usual practices, informed the Opposition of their intentions and, indeed, informed the Speaker of the House of their intensions in advance, so that we can all get on with the important business we have to conduct?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u161	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Brennan, Kevin Denis	Accuse government of procedural games	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons	The hon. Lady makes an important point, and she is right to refer to yesterday’s gathering of people from across the country to underline the importance of global warming and the need for renewable energy, including tidal energy. She will be aware that we are now the leading economy to commit to net zero carbon emissions by 2050. We have also reduced emissions by 25% since 2010, we have now had the longest period of producing power without the use of coal since the industrial revolution, and we are seeing more and more energy being generated from renewables. I think that tidal energy would be a very good subject for an Adjournment debate.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons.u205	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-27	Stride, Melvyn John	Support for renewable energy targets	2019-06-27 00:00:00	2019-06-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons	Amen to that, Mr Speaker. I think that is the only way to follow that one. It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Ealing North (Stephen Pound). It is perhaps not his swansong—in theory, he has another couple of years before the end of this Parliament, should we run to full term—but he has been a wonderful adornment and one of the funniest Members of Parliament for a long time. We also heard tributes to the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey). She is a member of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and was temporary Chair while my hon. Friend the Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare) was being selected and elevated to his place. Incidentally, it is good to see him, in his first legislative outing in that place, making a contribution today. But it will be sad to see the hon. Member for Ealing North go. We can see from his comments today why it will be sad This is a very short Bill. It is only three or four clauses long. It is a very simple extension of two dates and that is all it does. That has not stopped us from going on at quite some length about Brexit, hard borders, or not, in Northern Ireland and all sorts of other related matters, but at its heart it does something very simple indeed. It just extends the existing Northern Ireland (Executive Formation and Exercise of Functions) Act 2018 by two dates: an initial period and then, at Parliament’s discretion, a potential further short extension It is good to know that speaker after speaker and party after party has expressed their support for the Bill. I would like to put on record the Government’s thanks to everybody, right the way across the aisle, for their support. It does matter, particularly when it comes to Northern Ireland, that we have cross-party support and, ideally, cross-community support. That support, however, is not unqualified or open-ended. As the hon. Member for Ealing North and many other Members have said, this is, frankly, wearing thin. We have been here before, and there is both frustration and a great deal of concern about the missed opportunities in all sorts of areas in Northern Ireland, including on health, education, suicide prevention and even potholes. These things are not being done and decisions are not being taken. As many different Members said, this cannot continue for very much longer. In fact, I think the right hon. Member for Belfast North (Nigel Dodds) described it as the endgame and he was absolutely right.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons.u484	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-08	Penrose, John David	Support for Northern Ireland Bill	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-lords	The noble Baroness is making a very powerful point in respect of compensation for accidents, but there is also a massive bureaucratic issue in respect of insurance here. It is understated in the Explanatory Memorandum. Paragraph 3.7 says: “If there is no deal with the EU, UK motorists will also be required to carry a ‘Green Card’ which guarantees third-party insurance provision when driving in the EU. This may result in increased bureaucracy and costs for those drivers” That must be the understatement of the year: how can that not result in a massive increase in bureaucracy and inconvenience to drivers? Should the Government not be telling all the motorists proposing to leave the country in five weeks’ time that they are going to be required to have this green-card, third-party insurance provision which they do not have at the moment, and how they can secure it? I am a former Secretary of State for Transport, but I myself do not know what it is, so the population of Northern Ireland which, as the noble Baroness says, will be decamping over the next 12 months to the European Union, is going to have to be well informed about the green-card insurance system, about which it knows absolutely nothing at the moment.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-lords.u182	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-20	Adonis, Andrew	Insurance bureaucracy rise post-Brexit	2019-02-20 00:00:00	2019-02-20 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons	I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman shares my dismay that the non-discrimination clause would mean that popular policies already made by the Welsh Government and our Senedd to do with the smoking ban, the ban on plastic bags, and organ donation could have been called in and not been valid under this legislation.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons.u279	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-14	Saville Roberts, Liz	Welsh policies threatened by legislation	2020-09-14 00:00:00	2020-09-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	PC	Plaid Cymru	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-lords	My Lords, I begin by declaring my interests as in the register. My work with the British Healthcare Trades Association has identified concerns among the manufacturers of medical devices about what might happen with the future regulation of their products as a result of Brexit The regulation of medical devices and medicines is, of course, very necessary to protect patient safety, and it enables businesses to sell their products in the UK market, the much larger EU market and overseas. The evident need for the technical amendments that we are now considering suggests that the Government’s preparations to leave the EU are being made in great haste. It is also clear from them that there will be no benefit to anyone in changing the basis of the existing provisions for the regulation of medicines and medical devices Most countries recognise the great worth of current EU standards when they consider whether to allow products to be imported and sold to their citizens. If we leave the EU on 31 October, existing products that have been approved by the EU regime will of course continue to be approved, but surely problems will arise with new products as standards diverge in future—as inevitably they will. Will the Minister therefore say something about the potential impact of this legislation on the innovation of medicines and medical devices? British businesses will in future have to apply for licences to UK authorities if they want to sell new products here, and they will also have to seek approval from EU bodies if they wish to sell those new products in the European market and in the many other countries that already respect EU standards. This will mean two application processes, a potentially longer wait for approval and two sets of costs incurred in securing approval for new products Does the Minister accept that some businesses will feel inhibited in seeking approval for new products on that basis, that they might be tempted just to continue trying to sell old products that have already been approved, and that such inhibition might have a damaging impact on patient care and on the capacity of businesses to grow, especially if they seek to export new products? Will the Minister say something about how this impact on innovation might be ameliorated Most fundamentally, will the Minister confirm that leaving the EU on a no-deal basis will mean that we deny ourselves, and the rest of the EU, the benefits of sharing costs and expertise concerning the regulation of medicines and medical devices? Furthermore, does he accept that in the long run we need to work towards greater worldwide acceptance of standards to avoid new products requiring the approval of multiple agencies in the UK, the EU and elsewhere?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-lords.u91	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Rennard, Christopher	Brexit medical device regulation concerns	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	My hon. Friend was a distinguished predecessor of mine in this post. He is very much missed by the Department and, I am sure, by all those working in the NHS who came into contact with him. He rightly highlights the positive news in this announcement, including for his hospital trust. This money will allow it to invest and for the hospitals to continue providing first-class services to his constituents.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u175	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Argar, Edward John Comport	Praising predecessor and funding announcement	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons	Does the hon. Lady not welcome the fact that just short of 1 million more disabled people were in work in the past five years alone and that for the first time ever, which I emphasise, more than half of disabled people are now in work? We have made significant progress. There is much, much more to do, but we are in a significantly better position than we were in 2010.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons.u354	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-05	Tomlinson, Justin Paul	More disabled people employed now	2019-06-05 00:00:00	2019-06-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons	I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to define affordable housing in relation to household incomes; to amend the law relating to land valuation and compensation; and for connected purposes Our post-war planning system is a framework for managing change in our towns and cities and ensuring that new development meets the needs of local communities, for brokering and mitigating the gap between individual private interests and collective community needs, and for redistributing the scarce resource of land. Local plans safeguard land for particular purposes, including housing, employment, education, and community uses. Our heritage protection regime and national parks protect the buildings and landscapes that communities value. Planning policies seek to ensure that affordable housing is delivered and that across many dimensions of design, from building height to energy performance standards, new buildings take due account of their surrounding community and wider environment. Despite that, our planning system, deregulated and modified in recent years, too often fails to deliver against either the promises it makes or the real and pressing needs of local communities In a wider political environment characterised by a lack of trust in politics, our planning system is part of the problem. Every time a new housing scheme is delivered in which even the “affordable” homes are far out of reach of local people in housing need, every time a new building starts to look shabby after just a short time and every time planning permission is granted but nothing happens on the site for years, trust is eroded a little more. It is time to restore a vision of planning as the key to meeting the needs of local communities while also safeguarding their interests for future generations, and it is time for planning to step up and play its full part in helping to restore trust in democratic processes We need an agenda for reform, and I want to set out today two reforms—of the definition of affordable housing and of the rules around land values and viability—that could make an immediate difference. My Bill, which is supported by Shelter and the Town and Country Planning Association, seeks to reform our planning system to deliver the fair outcomes communities desperately need and to accelerate the delivery of genuinely affordable social housing The housing crisis is the single biggest practical issue facing communities across the whole country. The critical challenge for our planning system is to deliver the genuinely affordable social homes that are urgently needed in so many places, but there are some major problems that limit the effectiveness of our planning system and work in favour of landowners against the interests of communities Too many of the current mechanisms designed to deliver fair outcomes from the planning and development process essentially amount to shutting the door after the horse has bolted. Local planning authorities are required to negotiate affordable housing contributions with a definition of “affordable” that has no relationship to income, and the price of land, which is a key determinant of how many affordable homes are considered “viable”, can be hugely inflated by landowner expectations of a right to “hope value”—future speculative value based on planning permissions which the landowner does not own and has not realised, and which are not confirmed in law Our planning system is in need of major reform. The Government’s definition of affordable housing includes homes to buy at up to £450,000 and homes to rent at up to 80% of market rent. I and my party support the delivery of affordable entry-level homes to buy, and although I believe that there are ways to deliver these homes that are more effective and give better value for money than the Help to Buy scheme, my Bill does not cover homes for sale; it addresses the definition of affordable homes to rent Market rents vary across the country. Westminster council warned in 2013 that 80% of market rent would require a household income of more than £100,000 to sustain a tenancy on a three-bedroom home, while a two-bedroom home in Southwark in the same year would require £44,000—more than double the average household income in the borough The role of affordable housing has always been to meet the needs of those who cannot afford to rent or buy housing in the private market, yet the current definition has completely broken the ability of the planning system to deliver sufficiently for those in the greatest housing need. The figures bear this out. Over the past 10 years, the number of social homes built each year has fallen from around 30,000 to 6,400. At the same time, the number of so-called affordable homes at up to 80% of market rent has increased to 47,000. With 1.25 million families on the waiting list for social housing, there is no justification for a policy that fails to deliver homes that are affordable to households with low incomes. My Bill re-establishes the link between the definition of affordable and income, replacing the current definition of up to 80% of market price with a definition of “no more than 35% of net household income for lowest quartile income groups in each local authority area” Just as important as the definition of affordable homes is the cost of the land on which they are built. Despite reforms introduced last year, which were welcomed, our planning system still affords landowners the right to the future value of development rights or planning permission, which are granted by and in the gift of the planning authority. This so-called hope value dramatically inflates the cost of land, and inflated land prices make it much more difficult for councils to buy land in order to deliver social housing In a recent example in south London, a site with an existing use value of £5 million was put on the market at £25 million on the assumption that it could be developed for housing. It was later withdrawn from the market on the expectation that the value would rise even further, setting back the delivery of any housing at all on that site by years and making it almost impossible to deliver affordable housing, even by the current broken definition. This inflation of value either places sites far beyond the reach of councils and housing associations or requires a significant quantum of private homes to be built to cover the costs—homes that either push up density to levels that are unacceptable to the surrounding community or are built at the expense of genuinely affordable homes The current viability rules were developed to encourage and stimulate building in a recession, but they have evolved to become something quite different: a quasi-scientific basis for negotiation between developers and councils, with the overt objective on the part of developers of reducing their obligation to build affordable housing. The current system enables this to happen, as viability arguments can justify an appeal against refusal, and cash-strapped councils are reluctant to risk having to pay the applicant’s appeal costs if they lose. These negotiations are often not between equals, as councils struggle to resource the expertise they need to interrogate developers’ figures, and they also slow down planning, often taking years to resolve, creating great uncertainty and frustration It is vital that our planning system provides certainty and transparency, and puts an end to speculation on land values that prevents land from being used to deliver new homes. While landowners should receive fair compensation, coded in law, they should not be entitled to speculative value that does not arise from any action or effort on their part. My Bill creates a new requirement in planning law for local planning authorities to have a duty to include a policy in their local plans to capture betterment values where they arise, formally establishing a legal duty in the planning system to capture land value to be used for the benefit of communities and creating a strong justification for councils to argue for the resources they need to engage in viability discussions on equal terms with applicants. Finally, my Bill seeks to specify in law the key factors used for viability testing in relation to planning decisions, including placing explicit limitations on the expectations of developer profit and land values for compulsory purchase, providing greater certainty and transparency for both landowners and communities. Specifically, my Bill would: amend section 19 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, as amended, and add to it a statutory definition of an affordable home for the purpose of all planning decisions; make further changes to sections 14 to 16 of the Land Compensation Act 1961, as amended; and introduce a new statutory definition of the key factors used for viability testing in relation to planning decisions In the context of a national housing crisis, our planning system must be able to deliver the genuinely affordable homes that communities need. More than this, communities must be able to trust that it will do so, and that the promises made in local plans and in planning applications will not be watered down later on the ground of viability. My Bill will reform our planning system to place community need at its heart and increase the speed and quantum of affordable housing delivery to address the housing crisis. I am grateful to Members from across the House who have indicated their support for the Bill, and I commend it to the House Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Helen Hayes, Mr Clive Betts, Rosie Cooper, Emma Dent Coad, Ms Harriet Harman, Mr George Howarth, Norman Lamb, Caroline Lucas, Jess Phillips, Andy Slaughter, Alex Sobel and Sir Gary Streeter present the Bill Helen Hayes accordingly presented the Bill Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 22 March, and to be printed (Bill 344).	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons.u253	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Hayes, Helen Elizabeth	Affordable housing reform proposed	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-09-commons	My hon. Friend is right. I have spoken with him about his constituency concerns about this issue. It is absolutely right that the Football Association and all sporting bodies who, rightly, have links with sponsors across all sectors need to be very mindful of the impacts that such deals have on vulnerable people. We have made that very clear to the FA. As I said earlier to the hon. Member for Swansea East, the FA is looking into how it can alter the arrangements under that deal in the shortest order.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-09-commons.u146	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-09	Adams, Nigel	Football Association sponsorship concerns	2020-01-09 00:00:00	2020-01-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons	Next year will see the very latest technology deployed to save the 1920s concrete structure. The danger is that bringing back the heaviest lorries will hasten the collapse of the deck, destroying the listed asset forever. With continuing heavy lorries, it is estimated that the current repairs may last for only 15 years. Therefore, without a permanent weight restriction, my concern is that while progress will be slow on an upgrade to the A350, Cleveland bridge will again be in need of urgent, serious repairs very soon. We cannot let that happen. It is absolutely essential that we set a weight limit that the bridge can sustain for the long term The Department for Transport has expressed its view that the A350, as the major north-south link, is a viable option, and in Bath neither I nor the council would disagree. However, the Department for Transport has not done enough so far to create a consensus among councils and MPs in the Wiltshire constituencies to take this option forward to its final completion. It would be interesting to hear from the Minister whether the Government are actually looking into any other viable options In the meantime, people in Bath have waited for years for a solution. So, while we are waiting, the first thing that I would like to happen is for the Department for Transport to allow Bath and North East Somerset Council to have the power of decision making over its own infrastructure and keep the current 18-tonne limit. The council does not have that power on its own We are looking for the Government to consent to a permanent 18-tonne weight limit on Cleveland bridge. That is my ask to the Minister. The co-operation of the Government would benefit not only the people of Bath but the whole nation, and safeguard our heritage for future generations. The impact of a weight restriction would help to reduce air pollution across the city, in line with the Government’s important aim to improve people’s health. Last but not least, it would work in tandem with the Government’s ambition to improve their strategic A350 network and the overall economic benefits to the region. I look forward to the Minister’s response.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons.u368	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-17	Hobhouse, Wera Benedicta	Request permanent Cleveland Bridge weight limit	2020-11-17 00:00:00	2020-11-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons	I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and for advance sight of it. Like her, my thoughts, and those of my colleagues in the Scottish National party, are with the families of the victims, who it seems are far away and desperately trying to gather information about what might have happened to their loved ones. It is very difficult to fathom what it must be like to lose a loved one in such dreadful circumstances. I also join her in paying tribute to the response of the emergency services. I would like to express my concern for their wellbeing, given what they have seen. I associate myself with what the Home Secretary said about the gross immorality and inhumanity of people smuggling. I will speak about the specifics rather than this case, as it is an ongoing investigation. As the shadow Home Secretary said, an international trafficking and smuggling network can only be broken up through international co-operation. I know that the Home Secretary recognises that. She will also recognise that the European Migrant Smuggling Centre, which is a part of Europol, has been at the heart of this inquiry and of other inquiries into similar tragedies. A Europol source has been quoted as saying that the investigators at Europol are: “working around the clock trying to put together the pieces of the puzzle. ” I know the Home Secretary is keen for us to support the deal to leave the European Union, but that deal does not adequately address what plans the Government have to work with those vital EU institutions in future. It simply will not do to say that America has a relationship with Europol, because America is not in Europe—we are The UN’s trafficking envoy has said that withdrawing from Europol and Eurojust could curtail the UK’s ability to conduct the transnational investigations required to dismantle smuggling networks. Does she accept that leaving the European Union will make such investigations more difficult? If not, will she take this opportunity to clarify, in a way that she was unable to do before the Home Affairs Committee last week, what relationship she thinks the UK should have in the future with those institutions following Brexit?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons.u163	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-28	Cherry, Joanna Catherine	Brexit concern for investigative cooperation	2019-10-28 00:00:00	2019-10-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-27-lords	My Lords, in the House of Commons on 30 June, the Foreign Secretary said: “There has been no sustained pause”—[Official Report, Commons, 30/6/20; col. 144. ] in aid spending. How soon do the Government plan to resume their funding for organisations such as the World Food Programme, which does such vital work to reduce food insecurity in east Africa?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-27-lords.u33	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-27	Anelay, Joyce	Resume vital aid spending	2020-07-27 00:00:00	2020-07-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-26-commons	The goal of the Government is to bring R to below 1 to suppress the virus until a vaccine can keep us safe. That is the strategy I shall take the precise points that the hon. Gentleman raised. He asked for an exit strategy. The statement I outlined is the exit strategy: it is to keep the virus suppressed with the minimum damage possible to the economy and, indeed, to education, while we work as fast and as hard as we can towards a vaccine and with the widespread use of community testing across the piece to help to keep the virus under control I would have expected the hon. Gentleman to welcome the massive progress in Liverpool that has shown that a combination of sticking by the rules and community testing at very large scale can help to bring this virus right under control. Instead, he criticised that it does not get into harder to reach communities. That is exactly where we need to get into, and that is why we do it in combination and hand in hand with the local authority I praise Joe Anderson, and I also praise other local leaders, such as Ben Houchen in Tees Valley, who is working with us on this, Andy Street and leaders across the west midlands, and the hon. Member for Barnsley Central (Dan Jarvis) in South Yorkshire, who we are working with to get a community testing system up and running in places such as Doncaster. I want to see the community testing that has been successful in Liverpool rolled out right across the tier 3 areas as much as is possible, and I invite all councils to engage We invited councils to engage ahead of the decisions today, and we also invited all colleagues in the House to have an input, but it is important that we have clear public health messaging, because unfortunately we did see the number of cases going up and continuing to go up in those areas where local leaders were not working alongside us. It was a sharp contrast to what happened, for instance, in Liverpool, but also in other areas where the local leadership was so constructive and positive The hon. Member for Leicester South asked for a scorecard for the exit strategy. We publish the data, and if we can make it into an even more accessible format, I think that is a good idea. He asked about supporting the NHS—absolutely. I am delighted that, yesterday, my right hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with the support of the Prime Minister, put another £3 billion into the NHS, on top of the £6.6 billion that is already being invested. That money starts flowing this financial year for this winter and then runs into next year The hon. Gentleman mentioned the need to support people who have tested positive. We have put in place a £500 support payment. On NHS Test and Trace, I thought from the figures this morning that he would have welcomed the fact that the majority of in-person tests are now turned around within 24 hours. That is significant progress on the speed of turnaround in testing, for which I am very grateful to my team. There will be further support for local councils that find themselves in tiers 3 and 2 to support the action that is needed. But all in all, let us come together and work together to get this virus under control and keep it under control, so that we can get life back to normal as soon as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-26-commons.u222	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-26	Hancock, Matthew John David	Control virus lower economic damage	2020-11-26 00:00:00	2020-11-26 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-commons	I thank the Speaker for having granted this debate. I recognise that the performance of South Western Railway is not a new subject, rehearsed as it was in this Chamber by the right hon. Member for Twickenham (Sir Vince Cable) less than a year ago and as it has been repeatedly in general debates touching on rail issues For those of us unfortunate enough to be served by the franchise, it is a repeat customer to our postbags and our inboxes. It is an aggravation every single time we set off from our constituencies to this place, not knowing whether the train will be delayed, overcrowded, with functioning heating or air conditioning, dependent on the time of year—one can usually rely on the air conditioning in November and the heating on full blast in July—or, indeed, whether it will arrive at all. Those served by more minor stations—shall we describe them in that way? —all too often see late trains hurtling past, making up time by not stopping at all My hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Caroline Dinenage), who cannot contribute to this debate but is here to listen enthusiastically, has asked me to remind the House that Gosport is still to this day the largest town in the United Kingdom with no railway station, so her constituents are obliged to find their way either to Portsmouth by ferry or to Fareham by bus to access a still substandard service.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-commons.u460	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-01	Nokes, Caroline Fiona Ellen	South Western Railway service issues	2019-10-01 00:00:00	2019-10-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON;I	Conservative;Independent	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons	I thank the hon. and learned Lady for her remarks and her support for police officers, while also respecting the right to protest in a safe, sensible, and proportionate way, as we are in this public health emergency. It is important to labour the point that these protests are about injustice. It is right that we come together to find the right way, collectively, to tackle those injustices, fight for social justice, and deliver social justice for black, Asian and minority ethnic communities. As we have seen on our streets, however, by attacking our courageous police a small minority of individuals have acted in a wholly unjust way. The hon. and learned Lady mentioned the events in America, and it is dreadful, utterly heart-wrenching, and sad to see the level of protests there as well. As we saw over the weekend, a small minority of people are subverting the cause that people are protesting about We will continue to fight to solve inequalities and injustices. Earlier the hon. and learned Lady mentioned the policy of no recourse to public funds, as well as the Wendy Williams review and report. She also mentioned health inequalities, particularly for black and minority ethnic communities, and it was right for the Government to address that issue in the House last week. We must collectively come together. The Minister for Equalities is looking at this issue right now, and we must find an integral, overall approach across Government, with combined policies, not just one, to look at how we can serve those communities better, and address many of the inequalities that have been brought to light over recent weeks.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons.u224	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-08	Patel, Priti Sushil	Support protests; address injustice collectively	2020-06-08 00:00:00	2020-06-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords	My Lords, the Traffic Management Act 2004 imposed a duty on local authorities to manage their own road networks. The same Act also provided for traffic officers to be appointed to enforce these powers. However, Part 6 of the Act, which makes provision for penalties, has never been enacted. That leaves local authorities in a position where they have duties which they cannot carry out because they have no revenue streams from penalty notices to pay for enforcement. Will the noble Baroness look carefully at the Act, which, as I say, has never been properly brought into effect, but which does contain the powers that she is talking about? It would enable much more efficient management of both highways and pavements.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords.u23	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Bradshaw, William Peter	Enact Part 6 of Act	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords	My Lords, over the course of this crisis we have seen substance misuse and mental health services adapt their provision to better support homeless people facing multiple problems. Could the Minister say what the Government, in particular the new homelessness task force, will do to ensure that these flexibilities remain in place?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords.u20	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Tyler, Claire	Ensure enduring support for homeless	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons	Child poverty has now reached such an unconscionable level that Members are right to highlight that, this week, the Government were condemned by Human Rights Watch for pursuing what it called “cruel and harmful policies”. Whether or not the Government accept that, the reality is that 4 million British children now live in poverty, that that figure has grown by 500,000 in the last five years and that the majority of those children have parents who are in work. Let me ask the Government: if they do not accept that Conservative policies are creating this crisis, what do Ministers believe is responsible for this humanitarian disaster?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons.u69	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-21	Reynolds, Jonathan Neil	Child poverty crisis under Conservative policies	2019-05-21 00:00:00	2019-05-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-lords	The noble Lord is right to highlight the difficulties that many retailers are facing. There has been a big shift to online retailing as well—of course, many high street retailers do both—but we need to keep these matters under review. The high street is vital to many local communities, so we want to offer them as much support as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-lords.u40	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-02	Callanan, Martin	Supporting high street retailers	2020-07-02 00:00:00	2020-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-lords	My Lords, like most of your Lordships, I think, I welcome this White Paper, because it has taken us forward in a sensible and thought-through way. However, first, I am slightly confused in relation to the question posed by the noble Baroness about how seriously and where the Government are taking on board issues which are about the undermining of democracy. They are flagged up early in the White Paper, in paragraph 4, but then there is a vague section about leaving it to the regulator and having a code of conduct. That may be a valuable approach but should the Government not be taking action directly on such matters? For example, Sweden has produced a counterinfluence handbook designed specifically for these purposes. What are the Government’s intentions as far as that is concerned Secondly, the Minister said that time was of the essence so we are going through a three-month consultation process. Is the intention that there be legislation in the next parliamentary Session, whenever that may start? Thirdly and finally—I refer to my interests in the register on this—how are the Government planning to deal with adverts on the internet which are designed to be misleading? How will they deal with scammers who are on the internet?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-lords.u235	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Harris, Jonathan Toby	White Paper welcome but concerns remain	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-lords	My Lords, I share the dilemma expressed so often today, faced with an agreement that is far from the one I would like to see but far better than no deal at all. I particularly regret those places where even the Prime Minister concedes that the deal does not go far enough, and I make no apologies for revisiting my familiar theme of services, which contribute so much to the economy, exports and employment but which are so poorly served by this deal. Its service provisions are not only limited but are subject to a vast list of exceptions, varied by sector and member state. Crucial issues such as data adequacy, passporting rights and financial equivalence are unresolved, and the end of mutual recognition of qualifications is a serious blow Services were always going to be hit hard by the determination to end freedom of movement. So, although the deal allows short-term business visitors to enter the EU visa-free for 90 days in any six months, the activities they can undertake are limited—more a case of networking than work. Meetings, trade exhibitions, conferences, consultation and market research are all fine, but any selling of goods or services directly to the public is subject to a work visa, the requirements for which will vary across each member state The cultural sector is particularly ill served, with visa-free travel seemingly denied to working performers, artists and musicians, who now face new burdens of admin, carnets and costs. The absence of any creative, cultural or media services and occupations in the SERVIN 3 and 4 lists of suppliers and independent professionals will impact across music, film and TV, dance, theatre, journalism, gigging, photography, fashion and more The Prime Minister spoke this morning of “restoring a great British industry”— he meant fishing— “to the eminence that it deserves”, but one cost of this has been the sacrifice of services, including the creative industries, which really are one of the truly great British industries of today. The Minister assured me in yesterday’s very helpful briefing that performing artists and musicians are in fact covered in the deal, but I still struggle to understand how. Perhaps he could clarify this on the record today and, subsequently, in writing to the House This deal denies the next generation the freedoms that we have enjoyed, and I believe that it will have economic, social and cultural consequences. But today we are all Henry Hobson—we face Hobson’s choice—and I cannot support no deal. This agreement will at least delay divergence. It carries the promise of further agreements and, at five-year intervals, it gives us the chance to review and improve. It offers a framework on which our future relationship with our nearest neighbours can be built. For those reasons, and despite my reservations, I will be voting to implement it in law.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-lords.u121	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-30	Bull, Deborah	Regretfully supporting Brexit deal	2020-12-30 00:00:00	2020-12-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons	Those who claim asylum in the UK as third country applicants are currently waiting up to two or even three years for a decision. The Guardian reported last week that the third country unit was massively overworked and understaffed. May we please have a debate on the very real human cost of Home Office understaffing for those who rely on these decisions?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons.u275	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-09	Morden, Jessica Elizabeth	Home Office understaffing delays asylum decisions	2019-05-09 00:00:00	2019-05-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	The hon. Gentleman is right to speak of making sure that people have access to all the information available. Much of the work that we have been doing has been with PHE, which looks mainly at England, but I will find out what information I can provide about the work that is being done in Wales. The Government are looking to ensure that everybody has access to the information, and we are working with the devolved nations to make sure that they have examples of the best practice that is happening across the board.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u389	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Badenoch, Olukemi Olufunto	Ensuring universal access to information	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons	First, when it comes to policing, our police continue to operate by consent. They command the respect and co-operation of the British people by acting with integrity and accountability, and they do that in an outstanding way. When it comes to addressing social injustices and inequalities, as I have said repeatedly this afternoon, it is right that we come together as a Government and, in fact, as a House, because all right hon. and hon. Members have a duty to their own communities to be part of the solution in addressing the injustices. That is something that we can all collectively work to achieve.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons.u253	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-08	Patel, Priti Sushil	Policing integrity addressing social injustices	2020-06-08 00:00:00	2020-06-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-lords	I will call Members to speak in the order listed in the annexe to today’s list. Interventions during speeches, or before the noble Lord sits down, are not permitted, and uncalled speakers will not be heard. As this is Report, other than the mover of the amendment or the Minister, Members may speak only once in each group. Short questions of elucidation after the Minister’s response are permitted but discouraged. A Member wishing to ask such a question, including Members in the Chamber, must email the clerk The groupings are binding, and it will not be possible to degroup any amendment for a separate debate. A Member intending to press an amendment already debated to a Division should already have given notice in the debate. Leave should be given to withdraw an amendment. When putting the question, I will collect the voices in the Chamber only. If a Member taking part remotely intends to trigger a Division, they should make this clear when speaking on the group. During the debate on Amendment 20, the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, indicated that he intended to press Amendment 23, which was grouped with it, to a Division. I will therefore begin by inviting the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, to move this amendment formally. No further speeches will be heard on this amendment. I will now put the question. Does the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, wish to move Amendment 23 formally?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-lords.u153	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-06	Haskel, Simon	Amendment procedures and speaking rules	2020-10-06 00:00:00	2020-10-06 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-29-commons	Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I agree with the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) because, when I came in in 1992 as a new Member, the first thing I did was vote for a Speaker, without knowing any of the candidates in any detail whatsoever. But surely the best way to resolve this issue is not to have a general election in December.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-29-commons.u281	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-29	Gapes, Michael John	Oppose December general election	2019-10-29 00:00:00	2019-10-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	IGC	The Independent Group for Change	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons	I rise to speak briefly—I know time is short in this debate—about new clause 26. For the avoidance of doubt among those on the Treasury Bench, I will not be supporting the new clause, but, as Chair of the Treasury Committee, I want to put on the record some concerns about the loan charge on behalf of the many individuals who have contacted the Committee and of the Committee members who have expressed concerns about it. I hope that Ministers will listen and engage with MPs across the House on this issue The Committee has raised concerns about the loan charge in evidence sessions with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, and with HMRC and the Chartered Institute of Taxation. As the hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) said, it is right that people should pay their fair share of tax on their earnings, and we do not support anything that seeks to get around that. It is right that HMRC should act swiftly and firmly to close down such avoidance schemes However, tax law sets out time limits within which HMRC can open inquiries and make tax assessments. Normally, those time limits take account of whether a taxpayer has taken reasonable care to comply with their tax obligations, has been careless or has deliberately decided not to comply. They are seen as valuable taxpayer protections, giving a degree of certainty that takes appropriate account of taxpayer behaviour It is certainly concerning to me—I am not sure I can speak on behalf of the whole Committee, but I think it is fair to say that I speak on behalf of many of its members—that HMRC’s contractor loan settlement opportunity requires people who want to put their affairs straight to waive those protections, with the threat of the loan charge looming over them. It is not clear why it is necessary for that settlement opportunity to pressure people into paying tax for years that HMRC calls “not protected”—years where HMRC is out of time—even though it may have had the information it needed to open inquiries or raise assessments at the proper time.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons.u607	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-08	Morgan, Nicky	Concerns about loan charge reform	2019-01-08 00:00:00	2019-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons	My hon. Friend is right. Of course we are rolling over all the existing trade preference schemes with those nations, but as we leave the EU, we have opportunities to be more flexible. We have an opportunity to add new goods and to ensure that there is not a cliff edge for those developing nations, so that they do not see those trade preferences eroded when they get to a certain level of development. I completely agree with my hon. Friend that it is enterprise in this country that will help us to level up Britain, and it is enterprise across the world that will help us to level up world economies, taking more people out of poverty Working together with our friends and allies such as the EU, the United States and Japan, we will defend the frontiers of freedom, opportunity and prosperity for people right across the globe. We will engage at the G7 and the G20 and in the Commonwealth to move forward with WTO reform, update the rulebook and strengthen transparency. We are ambitious not just to defend freedom’s frontiers but to expand them. Just as we led the way in opening trade in goods during the past two centuries, as global Britain we will seek to do the same for services. The UK is the world’s second largest services exporter. The Office for National Statistics has estimated that two thirds of UK service exports are traded remotely, so we will be looking for advanced digital and data chapters to help businesses right across our country to succeed. Investment in the UK tech sector grew faster than any other country in the world last year, according to research by Tech Nation. We want to build on that potential, with future FTAs setting a global benchmark to take advantage of innovations in data, digital collaboration and the digitisation of trade We are determined to level up, to deliver opportunity and to unleash the potential of every part of the United Kingdom. We will promote the future of free trade in a world of rising protectionism. Tomorrow, we will demonstrate that Britain is back and we are ready to trade.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons.u371	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Truss, Elizabeth Mary	UK trade opportunities post-Brexit	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons	I pay warm tribute to my hon. Friend for championing the cause of that family, who suffered an unbelievable tragedy, and trying to make something positive of it. I am profoundly grateful for his support on these measures. I value the conversations that he and I have. He is a member of the Justice Committee, and I am extremely obliged to him for his warm support Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, 4 June. )	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons.u199	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-16	Buckland, Robert James	Grateful for support and advocacy	2020-09-16 00:00:00	2020-09-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons	My understanding is that if the manufacturer of this vital drug gets around the table with NICE and suggests a price within a reasonable scale, NICE would be very opening to listening. That is my understanding. Certainly, I understand calls from Members across the House for NHS England, NICE and the manufacturer to get around the table to try to find a solution. That seems to me to be the most sensible way forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons.u403	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-16	Dinenage, Caroline Julia	Negotiate drug price solution	2019-07-16 00:00:00	2019-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons	Further to the mention of modern-day slavery by the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker), it is right to record that my right hon. Friend has long and distinguished service in this House, both in government and in opposition, and her commitment to public service has been outstanding. Her vision and her determination to bring forward legislation against modern-day slavery led the world, and I hope she will continue her fight against slavery with us from the Back Benches so that we stamp out this evil scourge together.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons.u121	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-24	Spelman, Caroline Alice	Commending anti-slavery efforts	2019-07-24 00:00:00	2019-07-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-05-lords	My Lords, I agree with other speakers that it is, indeed, a surreal experience to be speaking on government compliance with the SGP on a convergence programme, given that we are diverging from the EU, notwithstanding our obligations under the transition period. I also note that within the EU the SGP escape clause has been triggered, but that the EU insists that this should not suspend programme reporting. That seems slightly odd, given that no member state will be able to say with any certainty where it might be even by year end, never mind in the next three-year period. However, since the UK is complying, I shall make two general points The obvious point is that although we have left, the economic strength of our largest trading partner—its growth and prosperity—continues to be of huge significance to the UK economy and business. The EU, just like all economies, is throwing everything at dealing with Covid-19, but we simply do not know how that will play out in the peripheral economies of the eurozone. All we can do is hope that this emergency continues to be a health and economic emergency and does not turn into a financial crash as well; 2008 still hangs over us. Looking at the stock of non-performing loans on banks’ books, a Financial Times report yesterday shows that four of the top five banks making provisions for bad loans are UK institutions, so we need to be vigilant as the situation unfolds My second point has to do with the UK record in terms of deficit and debt criteria. When I took over as the chair of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee, the UK was in excessive deficit procedure, for the perfectly understandable reason that our deficit and debt had rocketed during the financial crash of 2008. Although we were not subject to sanctions, due to Protocol 15, we were nevertheless subject to surveillance and had to demonstrate an endeavour to avoid an excessive government deficit. This was achieved and the UK returned to the preventive arm of the SGP, but the discipline of a deficit and debt target or range is an important one, as long as it is flexible and can adjust to emergencies to take account of automatic stabilisers My question to the Minister, in finishing, touches on the Government’s fiscal rules. While these are desirable in normal times, I have always disagreed with the straitjacket of PSNI not exceeding 3% of GDP, so will the Government rethink these rules in light of the current situation?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-05-lords.u123	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-05	Falkner, Kishwer	SGP compliance amid Brexit uncertainties	2020-05-05 00:00:00	2020-05-05 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD;NA	Liberal Democrat;Non-affiliated	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right to ask that question, particularly about Africa, where the high commissioner or ambassador is the most senior person on the ground and has people from all Government Departments in the UK reporting to him. Making sure that we have a one-Government approach to our diplomacy will be a central part of our new fusion doctrine.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons.u106	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-26	Hunt, Jeremy Richard Streynsham	One-Government diplomacy approach, Africa	2019-02-26 00:00:00	2019-02-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons	I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith) on securing this debate and on making such eloquent and passionate arguments, as he ever does, in support of dark skies. I am also impressed by his ability to weave into his speech historical references such as “The Lion in Winter”, about King Henry II and his powerful reign. I suspect that although we might see dark skies again, we shall never see the like of Henry II again. I congratulate Chris Cook, my hon. Friend’s researcher, on all the efforts that he has undertaken on my hon. Friend’s behalf I am also grateful to the other hon. and right hon. Members who have taken the time and, so to speak, seen the light in coming to this debate to speak on behalf of their constituents, and to the all-party group for the important work it is doing to preserve our dark skies. We share a common goal in wanting to limit the effect of light pollution from artificial light on our dark landscape. I therefore welcome the initiative taken by my hon. Friend and his noble Friend Lord Rees, the Astronomer Royal, in working to reconnect people with the wonder of the dark skies, as well as with a wide range of other benefits to society and the environment that flow from his endeavours Of course, when used wisely, artificial light can extend opportunities for sport and recreation, and it can enhance security and safety in and around our homes and on our roads. However, as Members have rightly pointed out, when it is used unwisely, artificial light can be a real nuisance, becoming pollution that undermines our enjoyment of the countryside and especially of our night skies. My hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs has rightly pointed out that we cannot overlook how much energy is wasted by unnecessary lighting, as we work together on achieving our climate change net zero goals. That point was also made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (James Sunderland), and I hope that the highways authorities around our country will take note I am aware of the effect that poorly located artificial light can have, not just on residents but on wildlife, not least in its capacity to interrupt their nocturnal habits. Any of us who has tried to get a good night’s sleep with a bright street light shining through their bedroom window will understand what I am talking about. In fact, if I may deviate slightly, one of my proudest achievements in my 10 years as the Member of Parliament for Tamworth is not having tried to fix the NHS or improve the schools or the road system of my town; it has been to get a street lamp moved so that a little old lady living next to the Belgrave Lakes could get a decent night’s sleep. She knows what I am talking about, and I think that we in this House also know what I am talking about. The same applies to ecosystems and protected species. There is increasing evidence that lighting can also have far-reaching effects on biodiversity and nature. The Government recognise these issues and are taking action I know that my hon. Friend appreciates, as we all do, that there are complexities surrounding the policy and legislation that govern artificial light. Responsibility for its monitoring and regulation crosses several Departments and also falls to local authorities. Our intention has been to utilise the planning system to get the lighting right from the outset. Local planning authorities can require applicants to submit a lighting strategy with their planning application, and they can consider on a case-by-case basis what conditions are appropriate I have no doubt that my hon. Friend’s all-party group will make an important and valuable contribution to the current work on our planning reforms, and I am grateful to the group for so ably and clearly setting out its 10 dark sky policies for Government. I believe that planning control can and should be a key determinant in this, with support from organisations such as the all-party group. That is why we have taken action to ensure that light pollution is addressed through the planning system.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons.u390	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-14	Pincher, Christopher John	Support for dark skies initiative	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-21-lords	My Lords, I thank my noble friend for introducing this debate on this corrected statutory instrument, which puts right a defect in its predecessor. It is important that there should be no risk that the Pension Protection Fund might be unable to intervene and protect its rights as a creditor in the event of a co-operative and community benefit society obtaining a moratorium under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act Since we started to debate the new measures introduced by the CIGA, my noble friend Lady Altmann and others have been assiduous in arguing for the strengthening of the powers and rights of the PPF. I agree that this is highly desirable, so I welcome the Government’s action in closing this loophole. Since entering into a moratorium under the Act is not in itself an insolvency event, without these regulations the PPF would be unable to exercise its rights as a creditor of a defined benefit pension scheme. The trustees might be placed under pressure to agree to the sale of an asset pledged to the pension fund in the knowledge that the PPF would be required to step in without taking account of the wider interests of the members of the scheme or, indeed, the payers of the levy which funds the PPF These regulations have been introduced without consultation in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, so it is welcome that we have the opportunity to discuss them today. While it is not directly the subject of today’s debate, I think it would be appropriate to hear a little more from the Minister on how the new provisions of CIGA are bedding down. My noble friend Lord Leigh of Hurley and others were concerned that a moratorium under the Act could not be applied for in order to rescue a company’s business, rather than the company itself. Further, I think it was unduly restrictive to exclude companies that have issued bonds in the amount of £10 million or more. As of 29 July, my noble friend Lord Callanan told your Lordships’ House that only one company had successfully entered into a moratorium. How many companies and other entities have now used the new moratorium process? I look forward to the contributions of other noble Lords and to the Minister’s reply to the debate.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-21-lords.u128	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-21	Trenchard, Hugh	Closing insolvency loophole for PPF	2020-10-21 00:00:00	2020-10-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons	Vaccine manufacturing for covid is being led by Ms Kate Bingham from the vaccine taskforce. Not only has she disclosed official sensitive documents to hedge-fund managers in the United States, but she has spent £670,000 of taxpayers’ money on private public relations advisers instead of using civil servants and is set to benefit financially from state investments. Ms Bingham should be sacked. If she is not sacked, who will be held to account for this gross conflict of interest and misuse of public funds? Will it be the Secretary of State or the Prime Minister?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons.u24	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Jones, Darren Paul	Demand for Bingham's dismissal	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons	It was important to get the scheme right, so we wanted to ensure that we consulted as many people as possible, which is why we had the call for evidence first. Indeed, Martin Forde, the independent assessor of the scheme, asked for extra time to meet more community leaders and more people who were affected. I believe that we have got it right now, and I am committed to ensuring that those who are eligible receive their compensation as quickly as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons.u213	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-03	Javid, Sajid	Compensation scheme thorough consultation	2019-04-03 00:00:00	2019-04-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-commons	On Tuesday, the Mayors of Salford, Manchester and London came together outside Parliament to hear from victims of the cladding scandal. They heard terrible stories from leaseholders trapped in properties about the financial ruin they face and the mental torment of going to sleep every night in a flat that they know could be a death trap. There is clearly a need for some time for a debate on the Floor of the House, and for clarity and leadership from the Government. The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) is sat next to the Leader of the House on the Treasury Bench. Can he guarantee that we will get that time as a matter of urgency?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-27	Madders, Justin Piers Richard	Cladding crisis debate urgently needed	2020-02-27 00:00:00	2020-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons	The Minister talks about years of service. I wonder whether he would commend and congratulate my constituent, Mrs Barbara McGregor, who is due to retire in January next year after 44 years of service in the Royal Navy to Queen and country. Mrs McGregor is taking part in Armistice services this week, and she was meant to be leading the parade march in the Bridgend county borough this weekend but was not able to. Would the Minister commend her and congratulate her on her service, and on the fact that she has put everything—Queen and country—as a sole focus of her entire service in the Navy?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons.u197	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-11	Elmore, Christopher Philip James	Commend Barbara McGregor's service	2020-11-11 00:00:00	2020-11-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords	My Lords, the noble Baroness did a good job of explaining clearly the recommendations of the report of which she was a party. I agree with her that Heath Robinson would be proud of the current university finance system. Indeed, it is now so complicated that it reminds me of Lord Palmerston’s famous remark, on the Schleswig-Holstein question, that there were only three people who understood it: one was dead, one had gone mad, and he was the third and had forgotten it. It is that complicated now, and part of the reason is that one reform has been layered on another reform. In the last 20 years, there have been three major reforms of the university finance system. Each Government have engaged in a substantial reform—indeed, as I look around the Chamber, I see the authors of many of them here, with the wounds to show for their works I had the misfortune to be closely associated with two of those reforms: the 1997 reform and the 2003 reform. The 2003 reform was the first of the seriously controversial ones, because it required an appreciable fee level of £3,000 being paid by students. I shall never forget that, when we had the general election shortly after in 2005, a friend of mine was standing in a university seat, and the fees were the big, controversial issue. I thought that I would defuse the issue at the beginning of my speech by saying that I knew that on my tombstone will be engraved the words “Tuition Fees”, and somebody shouted out from the back, “Not soon enough”. It got much worse than that, because that was £3,000 and we at least managed to create a consensus. Indeed, I was rather proud of the consensus we established between the two major political parties on tuition fees at the level of £3,000, because in my view big reforms of this kind only stick if you can create a consensus. It was not a complete consensus, because the Liberal Democrats were strongly in favour of abolishing all fees and fought the 2010 election on that The big mistake in policy, in my view, was the decision in 2010 to treble fees. That was a mistake in terms of making the policy acceptable, because it broke the consensus. It was the straw that broke the camel’s back in terms of public acceptability to go from £3,000 to £9,000. It was also a mistake in policy, because the universities did not actually require, in terms of any objective assessment of need, that degree of cash infusion. Indeed, they were not capable of absorbing it. All of the Government’s own modelling on the 2010 reform—the noble Lord, Lord Willetts, is not in his place, but he and I have debated this a lot over the years—was done on a fee level of £7,500, because £9,000 was supposed to be the upper limit, and it was expected that most courses would be at £6,000 and that the fees would be varied. What happened, of course, was that every university went straight up to £9,000. Universities could barely absorb the cash, which is the reason why the vice-chancellors are being paid £300,000 to £400,000, and in the case of the University of Bath—which I am afraid I got rather involved in because it was such a scandal—a salary of £500,000. It is not just the people at the top; there was a huge increase in the size of senior management teams and a big sense of resentment inside the universities themselves Although the noble Baroness is absolutely right to say that we need to tackle the issue of FE, it is important to understand that the inequity in the system has got substantially worse over the last 10 years. It is not as if we are moving towards an end point where there is going to be a fairer and better system. As the noble Lord, Lord Patten, said, the words of the report are excellent, but I am afraid that the graphs and figures—I always go to those first, as they tell you what is really going on—are startling. I invite noble Lords to compare Figure 3.1 with Figure 4.3. Figure 3.1, which gives university resources per student per publicly funded degree, shows that in real or constant terms the resources per publicly funded degree in the last 15 years have gone up from £18,000 to £28,000. There is no area of public spending which has been remotely as well protected as universities. However, Figure 4.3, which gives FE college sector total income in constant prices, shows a decrease in real terms, from spending of nearly £8 billion a year 10 years ago to under £6 billion a year now. So what we have done in the last 10 years—we as a Parliament and the coalition Government and the Conservative Government since 2010—while we have all been paying lip service to equality of opportunity and investing in the majority who do not go to university and are dependent on the FE system, is to massively increase resources per head in universities, irrespective of the type of university. There has been no differentiation of the kind that the noble Lord, Lord Patten, was talking about It is striking that, for a lot of courses in universities now, the fee level is higher than the actual cost of delivering the course. With fees at £9,500 per student per year, most social science and arts courses do not remotely cost that much to deliver. That is the reason why secondary schools, which teach about three times as much as universities in terms of per hour teaching in the arts, have a fee level—a grant per year—which is half the level of universities now, and that is being cut year by year, although they are the supply chain for the universities. At the same time as that has happened, we have had a huge cut in resources for FE On apprenticeships—we do not have my noble friend Lord Layard speaking, who has rightly championed apprenticeships over the years—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords.u118	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Adonis, Andrew	Complicated, inequitable university finance system	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. Already, during my short contribution to the debate, we see the way in which the steel industry connects with people in a way that some other industries do not. People know that this industry is a throbbing heart of the country. We need it if we are to be a proud, strong country, and closures such as the one she mentions have a detrimental impact on not only communities but the nation I called on then Prime Minister David Cameron to convene a steel summit in October 2015, which brought together unions, steelmakers, partners in the industry, key stakeholders and Government. At the summit, we focused on five asks. While applauding the Secretary of State for his urgent action, I am critical of the Government for not progressing those fundamental asks more strongly. There has been some movement, but not as much as we would like. Those asks need to be addressed to get the industry on to a level playing field, so that we can be not 30th in the league but battling for the top spot The first of the five asks was energy costs. Energy costs for the UK steel industry are much higher than those in Europe and elsewhere, and we still need to do something about that. There was mitigation through the carbon price floor tax, but it took about three years to come in. There is still a gap, and the energy required to support our steel industry is still far more expensive than elsewhere in Europe. We need to work on that if our steel industry is to move on to a level playing field where it can have a sustainable and strong future in the lifeblood of our nation The second ask was about procurement. The Government have taken some steps on procurement. In 2016, they brought in new procurement guidelines. It has been a struggle to make sure that that those public procurement guidelines bite and are effective. It is one thing to have something that is nice on a piece of paper, but it needs to have some traction in terms of action. Earlier this year, the Government published their analysis of where we are on that, and their own figures show that only 43% of the £158 million of procurement by the UK Government last year was produced in the UK Obviously, there is still work that can be done there. I am thinking of things such as the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, and would it not be good if that was all made with UK steel? I am thinking of things such as Heathrow, and I would like to commend Heathrow for the commitment it has made throughout to using UK steel wherever possible in its procurement processes, while of course meeting proper procurement guidelines. Heathrow has had the best practice in the way it has approached this, as indeed has Network Rail if we look at its performance. HS2 is another public procurement programme that could strengthen the messages it is putting out on procurement I was pleased on Monday to sign the steel charter, which is the work of steelmakers and the steel unions, and that the Government have also signed the charter. The charter points out that the UK Government steel procurement pipeline has been analysed as amounting to over 3 million tonnes over the next decade. That is a lot of steel: 3 million tonnes of steel is worth upwards of £2.5 billion in value. That shows the opportunity of steelmaking, and it also shows the degree of risk and vulnerability we will be exposed to if we do not have our own steelmaking capacity. I was very pleased to sign the charter, and I was pleased that the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the hon. Member for Pendle (Andrew Stephenson), also signed it. The Secretary of State has made it very clear that the Government intend to push forward with doing everything they can to improve performance on procurement The third ask was about business rates. The plant in Scunthorpe—this goes back to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North East about the size of these industrial sites—it is actually about the size of the town of Scunthorpe itself, and is bigger than the Borough of Chelsea and Kensington, so this is a big bit of land. The site in IJmuiden in the Netherlands, its sister site when we were part of Tata, is even larger—I think it is about three times as big—but the site in the Netherlands pays lower business rates than we do here in the UK. The playing field is not level, and we need to level this playing field. Despite the actions of North Lincolnshire Council to try to ensure the most effective business rates regime, the current framework of business rates means that the penalty for steelmakers is still very high Again, I come back to the point I made earlier about how these are businesses and industries that are in places: we cannot move the asset around the world to dodge taxes. That makes it easy for them to be taxed, but, frankly, why should these businesses be paying more of a burden than companies such as Amazon, Google and Facebook, which are fleeter of foot because their assets are of a different nature and they are not place-bound? That is a challenge, and it is one we still have. This playing field needs to be level The fourth ask was to take action to make sure that steel could not be dumped in the UK from markets where it is being produced at below the rate of production. To be fair, the UK Government did support the European Union in putting stronger tariffs and stronger defence instruments in place to protect steel from coming in—particularly from China, but from elsewhere as well—and that has had an effect. However, as we come out of the European Union, it is important that the Trade Remedies Authority remains vigilant on dumping, and that the current 40-plus trade defence instruments in place in Europe move across to protect our steel industry. That is particularly the case given the actions we see being taken in the United States and the problem of steel displacement, with steel that would be going to the United States trying to come into the UK and Europe. My fifth ask was about research and development, and the environmental improvements that are needed. The Government have done some things on that, but they could do more. It is important that our steel industry is efficient compared with steelmaking elsewhere in the world. Indeed, it must become ever more efficient so that it can be part of a future green industry, and contribute to our future in an effective way After the new Government were elected, in 2016 they created—to applause from Opposition Members and, I hope, from Government Members—a Department that included the phrase “industrial strategy” in its title, and recognised the need for such a strategy. I had hoped for fast progress on a sector deal for steel to address some of the underlying issues, but sadly, such progress was not as brisk as one would have wished. We are still talking about the need to progress a sector deal for steel, and we now have this crisis in our midst. Had we had such a deal to address some of the underlying issues, I am optimistic that we would have been less likely to have this crisis. The Secretary of State needs everybody’s support and commendation for his efforts to ensure a positive outcome to the current crisis, but I hope that he and his team will also move forward with work toward a proper sector deal, so that the fundamental issues can be addressed Let me conclude by considering the current crisis and challenges. British Steel is a sound and effective business, and it has made a lot of progress over the past three years since the change of ownership. It has become much slicker. Steel is a cyclical business—enough money must be made when at the top of the cycle to get through the bottom of the cycle, but the business will make money. Steelmaking also needs a lot of investment to keep it at the edge of best production. It is a hungry business, but it is a good business The uncomfortable truth is that this current crisis would not have happened if we had not decided to leave the European Union, and then made a mess by not getting on with it. That has created uncertainty, in particular with the threat of a no-deal exit, which everyone in steelmaking agrees would be bad news for our ability to keep our steel industry in good shape. I shall not linger on that, however, because the important point is to focus on where we go next Other questions probably need to be asked. For example, people have raised various questions about whether Greybull Capital has acted as a good steward of the business, and there are concerns about why the UK appears to find it more difficult than some of our European neighbours to provide support within the state aid rules. Those questions have been raised, and the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee might wish to consider them, as that would be the appropriate vehicle to look into and scrutinise those issues Now is not the time for looking backwards; now is the time to look forwards. British Steel has a team in place from the official receiver to run it, and we need to keep the business going until new owners are found. From listening to the Secretary of State yesterday, I understand that his interest is to take this business forward as a going concern into the future. The management team, trade unions and the Government are working urgently with the receiver to ensure that this business goes forward strongly. Leadership at a local level is provided by the management team, led by Gerald Reichmann. The unions have also provided support, and Paul McBean, Ian Smith, Martin Foster and other colleagues have made a real difference in taking forward a difficult situation, and building a determination to ensure that this business, this industry, has a positive future The last thing I want to say is that I would like to thank all the people who have contacted me and the steelworkers, locally and in the supply chain, to express their support and solidarity from across the country and across the community. That means a lot to people. It means a huge amount to people that everybody cares. And because everybody cares, I am confident about our future: I am confident about steelmaking in Scunthorpe, in Teesside, in Skinningrove, in the United Kingdom in the future. The emblem on Scunthorpe Borough Council’s mast was “The heavens reflect our labours”. Let us hope the heavens are on our side as well.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u262	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Dakin, Nicholas	Support steel industry revitalization	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons	My hon. Friend will know that some 41,000 schoolchildren from across the United Kingdom have availed themselves of the informative “Lessons from Auschwitz” programme, which in the past three years has been extended to Northern Ireland, where hundreds of schoolchildren have been able to get involved. Does he agree it is essential that the new Northern Ireland Executive continue the programme so that future generations can learn about Auschwitz and about combating racism, hatred and antisemitism?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons.u314	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-23	Paisley, Ian Richard Kyle	Continue Auschwitz education program	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for giving way; she is making a very good speech. I have been chair of the disability all-party parliamentary group for the last two parliamentary terms, and I have been contacted by the Don’t Screen Us Out community, who are particularly concerned about the scope of the regulations and the impact on families with Down’s syndrome children. I hope that the Minister will comment on whether there has been consultation with that group, because, as I am sure the hon. Lady would agree, that would be very helpful.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons.u418	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-08	Cameron, Lisa	Consultation on Down's syndrome regulations	2020-01-08 00:00:00	2020-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords	I am not aware of whether an assessment has been made but I will write to the noble Lord to confirm on that point. The noble Lord, Lord Greenway, mentioned the establishment of the expert advisory group to help us to consider how best to manage the wreck in future. This was formed in November 2017 and is made up of an independent chair, experts from the salvage industry and various government experts with knowledge of dealing with wrecks or experience of dealing with munitions of the type contained in the wreck An important function of the group is to provide a steer of potential options for long-term management of the wreck. The group is currently considering whether monitoring and regular surveying is still the correct course of action or whether a more proactive intervention should be considered. As the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, suggested, interventions could include the removal of munitions or some form of containment of the wreck, as the noble Lord, Lord Addington, mentioned. I stress that the advice I have been given is that this is not as straightforward as the noble Lord perhaps suggested On the decision-making responsibility, any decision about a change of approach to the wreck would be made by Ministers. We appreciate that there are no risk-free options, as noble Lords have pointed out, which is why we are using the most qualified experts we can find The noble Lords, Lord Harris and Lord Addington, asked about contingency planning in the event of an incident. Responsibility lies with the Kent Resilience Forum, which includes all the first-response services. It is kept closely updated about the results of the survey and has wider plans for the safety of the area, of which any incident with the wreck obviously forms a key part The noble Lord, Lord Harris, asked about a tidal wave that might travel up the River Thames in the event of a detonation. We do not believe that would be the outcome. Rather, we believe there would be a sudden displacement and replacement of water, which would impact the immediate vicinity but would not form a travelling wave The noble Lord also asked about incidents and incursions. We have talked about the paddle-boarder and the Chinese fishing boat in 2002. We believe that the 2012 security operation was precautionary. I have no record of other incidents With regard to conversations with the US Government, the department is not sure why any offer of help was rejected. The issue has not been discussed recently and responsibility sits clearly with this Government To conclude, I again thank the noble Lord, Lord Harris, for bringing this debate on such an important issue and all those who have spoken. I hope that the measures I have outlined in my response provide some confidence to those who live near the wreck, and to your Lordships, that the issue is taken with the utmost seriousness by the Government. The SS “Richard Montgomery” remains the most surveyed and the most monitored wreck in the country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords.u111	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Barran, Diana	Wreck management and assessment uncertainty	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-13-lords	The noble Baroness makes some very good points. In my view, it is essential that all businesses experiencing increased costs and disrupted cash flow as a result of the virus are supported. The FCO is working to monitor closely coronavirus throughout the world and we are using our diplomatic network to do our utmost to help all British companies.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-13-lords.u257	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-13	Callanan, Martin	Support for businesses amid virus	2020-05-13 00:00:00	2020-05-13 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-lords	The noble Earl is obviously right to reflect on the challenging funding environments faced by local authorities over the past few years, but he will be aware that local authorities across England will see a 4.4% increase—£2.9 billion in real terms—in their core spending power in 2020. Local authorities are extremely well placed to decide how to prioritise their spending. We are clear that expenditure on arts and culture is one of the best decisions that local authorities can make.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-lords.u18	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-03	Barran, Diana	Local funding challenging but increasing	2020-03-03 00:00:00	2020-03-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-commons	Yesterday, the Prime Minister said that he will be doing much more to support the voluntary sector. Bearing in mind that 10% of charities are likely to fold, with a deficit of £10 billion accumulated over six months, what more will the Treasury be putting on the table and when will that be apparent?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-commons.u218	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-03	Maskell, Rachael Helen	Support for voluntary sector aid	2020-11-03 00:00:00	2020-11-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons	On behalf of the Democratic Unionist party, I wish to convey my thanks to Kamal El-Hajji for his time in this House. There is no doubt that, on many occasions, we all felt a bit more secure because he was here. As the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) said, he would summon us with a look, and he would look after us and tell us what to do As you know, Mr Speaker, I am usually here in the late hours for the Adjournment debate and, on many occasions, the Serjeant at Arms was here as well, so we got to know each other. It is one of the wee things you probably notice, Mr Speaker, but he would step back and click his heels together whenever he took down the Mace, which reminds me of when I clicked my heels during my Army days—he seems to have that bearing, too Mr Speaker, you can take much credit for your leadership, and we all greatly welcomed the House having its first BAME Serjeant at Arms. We were very pleased to see him here This House does tradition, history and culture exceptionally well. Every nation around the whole world wishes that it had the tradition and history that we have, and Kamal brought that across each and every time that he represented us in the House. This great nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland does it so well, and does it well together. Kamal is always perceptive, helpful and personable and I put on the record our thanks to him. Kamal epitomises all that is best in the House, and I wish him, his wife and his children every happiness for the future and thank him very much for what he does and for what he has done for us in the past. Whoever the new Serjeant at Arms is, we look forward to them doing equally well; we have a great tradition here. Kamal’s work in the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Constitutional Affairs, and the fact that he received the British Empire Medal, reflect on his qualities, which the House has had the pleasure and happiness to enjoy together—not only in friendship, but in respect of the security position that he held for us.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons.u363	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-22	Shannon, Richard James	Praising Kamal El-Hajji's service	2019-07-22 00:00:00	2019-07-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons	I thank the hon. Member for that question. We oppose these tariffs vigorously. We are stepping up talks with the US and we were pleased that in August the US did not extend the tariffs to blended whisky, and actually removed them from shortbread. The irony is that the Scottish National party are urging us to enter into direct trade talks with the US—something that we are already doing, but something that we would not be able to do if we followed its policy of rejoining the European Union. I just remark on the SNP’s chutzpah in urging us to do something to which it is fundamentally opposed: engage directly with the United States on trade policy.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons.u24	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-08	Hands, Gregory William	Oppose tariffs support US talks	2020-10-08 00:00:00	2020-10-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I will be brief. It has been confirmed in the last few moments that the Prime Minister is to make a statement in Downing Street at 8 pm this evening. Given that this debate can run until just after 6.20 pm, and there are two other items on the Order Paper that could take up to three hours beyond the moment of interruption, does this House have any mechanism to get the Prime Minister to make that statement to the House, rather than to the public via the media in Downing Street?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons.u503	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-20	Murray, Ian	Prime Minister's statement timing process	2019-03-20 00:00:00	2019-03-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons	Over the past few years, many serious questions have been raised over Huawei, so it seems reckless even to consider it for the 5G network. The Secretary of State said earlier that Huawei is not operating in sensitive or defence areas, but as we become ever more reliant on the internet of things the ability to shut down a network poses a serious threat to our national security. If he is so confident about Huawei’s integrity, why is it not operating in sensitive areas?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons.u235	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-25	Monaghan, Carol Frances	Huawei threatens national security	2019-04-25 00:00:00	2019-04-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-lords	My Lords, I declare an interest as president of the Association for Decentralised Energy The pandemic has reminded us of the importance of local community structures. This is the great challenge and the great opportunity in decarbonising heat, for heat is, at its heart, local. The best solution to decarbonising heat in any area is specific to, and determined by, that area. Coupled with the Government’s commitment to improve energy efficiency in homes, schools and hospitals, locally driven heat solutions will come together to create a decarbonisation landscape Heat networks have a unique role in capturing and using otherwise wasted heat. The Government have demonstrated their commitment to heat networks by announcing a new green heat network fund to support, in particular, those using waste heat. An example is a project in Enfield to supply waste heat to at least 15,000 homes. In due course, that will save 5,700 tonnes per year, equivalent to the carbon sequestered by over 6,000 acres of forest During the Heat Networks Industry Council’s launch last week, my right honourable friend the Energy Minister, Kwasi Kwarteng, underlined the alignment between government and the industry’s ambitious vision for the role of the heat network sector in delivering a net-zero future. This council is committed to bringing in investment and creating up to 35,000 new jobs. A project in Leeds is specifically committed to new apprenticeships and jobs. It is surely more important than ever to invest in upskilling and retraining to create a green-collar workforce for the future. The heat networks industry is fully committed to playing its part in a fairer, cleaner and more sustainable economy post this pandemic.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-lords.u107	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-11	Spring, Richard John Grenville	Decarbonising heat through local solutions	2020-06-11 00:00:00	2020-06-11 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords	Anybody with any experience of public transport knows that one of the best things that can be done is to stagger working hours. The early spring is the best time of the year to do it since it is light for so long. What is being done about public bodies and public employers, which should be being directed by the Government to spread working hours? Will the Minister consider doing the same thing for private employers?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords.u213	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-14	Bradshaw, William Peter	Stagger working hours initiative	2020-05-14 00:00:00	2020-05-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords	My Lords, the Minister is suggesting that the oligopoly of major-volume housebuilders has let us down on quantity, affordability, design, workmanship and quality of product. Could he update us on the arrival of a new homes ombudsman, who can deal with a good number of the complaints that, justifiably, people are making about the appalling quality they experience when they buy some of these properties?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords.u49	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Best, Richard	Housing quality; ombudsman update	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	I congratulate the Secretary of State on his science-led strategy, from which we are now reaping the dividends and which is genuinely saving lives. But the science also tells that as we reduce the propensity of the virus in the population, we can also reduce the social distancing that we applied. Businesses, residents and teachers across Arundel and South Downs are united in their appetite to move to 1 metre as quickly and as carefully as possible. Will he update us on that?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u144	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Griffith, Andrew	Science-based strategy reduces social distancing	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-lords	Before the Minister sits down, would she be willing to talk to us a little more about the detail of the subordinate legislation on dashboards? She kindly said that she would do that on the first part of the Bill, but several noble Lords are interested in the subordinate legislation on the dashboard.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-lords.u116	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-28	Neville-Rolfe, Lucy	More detail on dashboard legislation	2020-01-28 00:00:00	2020-01-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords	Does the Minister agree that racism in the police service, evident in stop and search and disproportionate disciplinary procedures against BAME officers, arises from ignorance and prejudice? Does she also agree on the importance of education and training in the need to look beyond superficial difference to the reality: that we all have much in common?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords.u54	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Singh, Indarjit	Racism in police; need education	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-lords	My Lords, I begin by echoing my friend, the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes. I, too, am deeply sorry that he is not with us, as he was in such splendid and rumbustious form last week. All I would say to him is, “Haste you back”, and I hope he will be able to take part again on the Floor of the House very shortly I also genuinely thank my noble friend Lord Callanan for tabling and moving Amendment 14. That has shown that he and his ministerial colleagues have listened to what was said in your Lordships' House in Committee, and for that I am sure we are all grateful. My noble friend is exactly right when he says in the United Kingdom Parliament—we are not a federation—the buck stops with Westminster. That is entirely right, but there is deep suspicion in many quarters about the word “consult”, because it can have a variety of meanings and interpretations. “Politely inform” is often what people mean by “consult”. That is why I am particularly attracted to the wording of Amendment 20 in the name of the noble Baronesses, Lady Hayter and Lady Finlay, and the noble Lord, Lord Hain. This requires an explanation. It is entirely proper that the buck stops here. It is entirely proper that the ultimate decision is made in Westminster, given the present structure of our United Kingdom, where, as has been said, certain specific powers are devolved, but ultimate power remains here Having said all that, it is important that “consult” means consult—discuss, evaluate and determine the merits before a final decision is made. Therefore, I say this to my noble friend: thank you for coming as far as you have. I in no sense question or impugn his sincerity because I know from experience that he understands the proper meaning of “consultation”, but not everybody in ministerial office does. There have even been recent occasions when advice has been totally jettisoned If we are to move forward with the devolved Administrations, it is important that we genuinely consult. I like the idea of giving them time but not allowing them to procrastinate indefinitely; a month seems a good length of time. Then, it is perfectly reasonable that the Westminster Parliament should insist on having its will, but that it explain precisely why. We have got to treat the devolved Administrations as bodies of articulate, well-informed public servants who are trying their best to serve Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Of course, the elephant in the room—we must all be honest enough to admit this—is that, whereas the Governments in Northern Ireland and Wales accept the union of the United Kingdom, in Scotland, they do not. In Scotland, we have a Government who, perfectly honourably—it is an entirely legitimate ambition to have, although I strongly oppose it—have one ultimate aim: to break up the United Kingdom by withdrawing from it. So, it is very important that those of us who believe in the United Kingdom do not succumb to those who want to manipulate themselves out of it, and that we are able, in the interests of the United Kingdom—while there is one—to argue for policies conducive to its continuance The balance and wisdom implicit in Amendment 20 commends itself to me. I hope that my noble friend will reflect on that and perhaps say that he will come back at Third Reading with a slightly amplified version of the welcome and, again, genuinely meant and perfectly sincere Amendment 14, because I do not really think we can just leave it at that.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-lords.u159	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-23	Cormack, Patrick	Devolution consultation respect crucial	2020-11-23 00:00:00	2020-11-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-01-commons	Constantly, is the answer. I was brought up on the Welsh border, in Cheshire. I know exactly how porous the border is. Of course, public health is devolved and I would be surprised if the hon. Lady was arguing against the devolution of health powers. In fact, I have received a text from my Welsh opposite number during this session, so we have a constant conversation and dialogue to try to minimise exactly the sorts of issues that she talks about.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-01-commons.u202	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-01	Hancock, Matthew John David	Border public health cooperation	2020-10-01 00:00:00	2020-10-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-29-lords	I thank the Minister for her response. I completely agree with her. Disinformation and conspiracy theories flooding the internet seriously undermine the efforts of those working hard to keep us safe. The Government set up the Rapid Response Unit to work with social media companies to take action and combat fake news, yet we have heard very little about its work and received no detail on what its achievements or actions are. When will the Government make a statement on the work of the Rapid Response Unit? What assessment have they made of the effectiveness of the actions of the social media platforms so far?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-29-lords.u29	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-29	Kennedy, Alicia	Requesting Rapid Response Unit update	2020-04-29 00:00:00	2020-04-29 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-lords	My Lords, I declare an interest in that my husband is a research engineer on the science park in Cambridge and my last job before I came into your Lordships’ House was as the director of Association of the Universities in the East of England, where most of my work involved the exploitation of projects, which relates to the point that the noble Lord, Lord Krebs, made about how important it is to have strategic development but you cannot do that without blue-skies research coming first. The key point about the ERC and the MSCA is that that blue-skies funding is disappearing fast around the world and UK universities and research institutes have been relying very heavily on it The UK is a world leader in research and innovation. We produce 15.2% of the world’s most cited articles, with only 0.9% of the population, and the UK ranks first among competitors by field-weighted citation impact, which is a real indicator of research quality. That, frankly, is why we are major contributors to the current Horizon 2020 programme and why we have been net beneficiaries in the programme. While other noble Lords have been speaking, I have been crossing out parts of my speech. I think that I am ending up with the highly political part of the report, which is expressed in a beautifully delicate way, and I apologise in advance for being blunter and perhaps less delicate The underwrite guarantee offered by the Government sounds fine in principle but, as Vivienne Stern, the director of Universities UK International, tells us at paragraph 72 on page 30 of the report, it is, “good up to a point”. She also, “highlighted the issue of the UK becoming ineligible, as a third country, to access the ERC and MSCA, which she said accounted for ‘about 60% of all the funding that the UK wins’ from Horizon 2020” The key point here is how easily and how fast things can go wrong. The report makes reference to some of the difficulties that Switzerland faced. I was very aware of that in the run-up to, and during, the referendum. Appearing in public debates reminded me of the Monty Python film in which it was asked, “What have the Romans ever done for us? ” I repeatedly cited Horizon 2020. At that point we had put in about £3 billion and, as a nation, had received about £5 billion back. That figure was about to increase and there was a reason for that: the absolute excellence of our blue-skies research, whether in universities, in research institutes or even in a few more private organisations Switzerland, too, had a very proud history of research. It wanted to be a full participant but in 2014 it held a referendum on mass immigration. At the time, its own scientists were pretty relaxed about the possible consequences of that, but a narrow majority approved the introduction of quotas and permits even for migrants from within the EU, which ruptured a long-standing agreement with Brussels. Unfortunately, as the Guardian cited at the time, the knock-on effects were swift and drastic. A Belgian, Vandevyver, commented at the time: “Certainly, few people here thought the outcome would have any major impact on their work. So what happened afterwards came as a big shock to many. The consequences have been quite dramatic. And depending on what happens now”— this was in 2015— “they could get worse” Switzerland’s status was rapidly revoked. It attempted to negotiate full associated country status but unfortunately it was completely knocked out. For the following two and a half years, the funding was subbed by money from the Government and particularly from the Swiss National Science Foundation. However, that was only ever intended to be temporary. Therefore, what was the solution? The Swiss Government changed the referendum arrangements in the Bill that would have restricted free movement I cite that because on page 50 of this excellent report is a summary of some of the key points in the immigration White Paper. It talks about having very time-limited visas for exchange students and making sure that any EU citizens get specific leave to remain if they stay here for a particular period. It also says that, even in the transition period, anyone following anything other than the tier 4 route might find it difficult to get grants When I first read that White Paper, the alarm bells for the university sector in particular and for Horizon 2020 and its successor programmes rang loud and clear. We need to understand what will happen if we continue with the hostile environment. Academics from the European Union are already finding difficulties when they apply early for leave to remain—they do not have to do it yet. One such colleague went back home for six months to help look after a relative who was unwell and subsequently died, and when they came back they were told by the Home Office that their service to date had been broken and they had to start the clock all over again. I suspect that Brussels will take a very dim view of arrangements like that In rapid conclusion, I have just one other question to add to all the others that have been put to the Minister. What guarantee, in addition to the full underwrite guarantee, will he be able to get from the Home Office about ensuring true free movement for the university and research sectors that will enable the UK to participate fully in Horizon 2020 and its successor programmes? Otherwise, we will be in the same position as Switzerland, going very rapidly into a black hole and having to spend years trying to dig ourselves out of it. The consequence would be that we would cease to be a leading research country in the world.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-lords.u110	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-01	Brinton, Sarah Virginia	UK research funding and immigration concerns	2019-04-01 00:00:00	2019-04-01 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons	I apologise to my right hon. Friend. His name was in my mind because it was on the monitor before the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth spoke It is important to see these clauses in the wider context. My heart sank when I picked up the first draft of the agreement, because this was not the departure from the European Union that I had expected to see expressed in the text of the agreement; it was the same oppressive, impenetrable text with endless references to the treaties as they exist. The withdrawal agreement was clearly a concerted attempt by the European Union to continue its influence, even through the direct applicability and direct effect of European Union law on the United Kingdom.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons.u377	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-21	Jenkin, Bernard Christison	EU trying to maintain influence	2020-09-21 00:00:00	2020-09-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for putting that point on the record. She is absolutely right to do so. I very much hope that we will outline imminently the steps that we are looking at taking to support councils further. Yesterday, the Chancellor announced in the House a series of measures to support communities in response to the crisis. The funding he announced amounted to more than £330 billion of financial support, equivalent to 15% of UK GDP. The £10,000 grants to small businesses that are eligible for small business rate relief and the £25,000 grants to retail, hospitality and leisure businesses operating from smaller premises will no doubt help to alleviate pressure on local businesses across the country, but we understand the pressures that are about to come. The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy will write to all local authorities in the coming hours to set out how exactly those are to be delivered and the mechanisms by which they can be administered.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u214	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Hall, Luke Anthony	Supporting councils amid crisis	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons	Does my hon. Friend share my disappointment that the Government did a VNR only at the end of the cycle? The Netherlands has already done one and is embarking on a second. The Government should consider doing a domestic VNR and an international VNR as separate processes. Donor countries do only a domestic VNR, but we are a country that both gives and has to look at what we are doing ourselves. We should probably do that as two separate processes involving different stake- holders and people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons.u335	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-11	Russell-Moyle, Lloyd	Separate domestic and international VNR	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords	My Lords, I declare that I am an honorary fellow of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine. How will the Government ensure that emergency departments never again become the crowded places that they were, which act as a source of nosocomial infection—hospital-acquired infection—for the vulnerable and those caring for them, especially child carers, who might present with acute injuries, particularly once they are out and undertaking more activities?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords.u16	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Finlay, Ilora Gillian	Preventing crowded emergency departments	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons	One of the key measures in Transforming Rehabilitation was the supervision of 40,000 people who had not previously been supervised and whose sentences were shorter than 12 months. Previously, we had no idea what they were doing, because they were not being supervised by any probation officer. By supervising those 40,000 people—they tend to be a cohort of prolific reoffenders—we end up with many more recalls than happened previously. The answer must be to consider on a case-by-case basis whether the recalls are justified, but we must also acknowledge that it is a good thing to supervise 40,000 more people. When they were not supervised, the public were more endangered.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons.u298	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-04	Stewart, Roderick James Nugent	Supervised 40,000 previously unsupervised offenders	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-20-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox). As I was listening to him, I could already see coming back the red lines that caused the problem for the previous Prime Minister. We are to do a trade deal by the end of 2020 but, at the same time, we are not to have any degree of alignment with the European Union. When we hear talk of writing into the Bill that there will be no extension, that is a matter of politics. If the Government can legislate for that today, they can equally legislate to remove that burden before the end of 2020. I predict that that may indeed end up being the position, because the harsh reality is that that deadline means that the risk of a no-deal Brexit, which we all fear, is very much back on the table Scotland could not have been clearer last week. We did not vote for Brexit, and returning the SNP with a greater mandate shows that Scotland still totally and utterly rejects Brexit. Yet the Prime Minister is blindly hurtling towards the cliff edge with these deeply damaging Brexit plans, which will leave us poorer and worse off. This legislation will hit our economy, cost thousands of jobs in Scotland, sell out our food and drink sector and harm people’s livelihoods. The Scottish National party will not vote for this flawed and deeply damaging legislation We reject this toxic Brexit legislation and make clear that this UK Government cannot drag Scotland out of the European Union before gaining the legislative consent of the Scottish Parliament. My question to the Prime Minister is this: will he accept that the devolved Administrations have the right to withhold their legislative consent? Will he now enter into constructive dialogue with those who seek to defend our rights—our Parliament in Edinburgh and our First Minister? We know the reality is that this Prime Minister will ignore Scotland; he will keep ploughing ahead despite the fact that Scotland voted to remain in the European Union. At last week’s general election, Scotland voted decisively to escape Brexit and to put Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands. The Prime Minister has no mandate to drag Scotland out of the European Union. It is clearer than ever that the people of Scotland must have their say over their future, rather than the broken Brexit Britain that he wishes to impose on us Our economy will be smaller, weaker and poorer as a result of our leaving the European Union. Why? Because of the ideology of the Brexit fanboys—those in the Leave.EU campaign who now run this Government. Despite the Prime Minister’s assertions, Brexit is already having an impact on our economy. Analysis in the “State of the Economy” report by Scotland’s chief economist shows that continuing uncertainty is resulting in a half a billion pound shortfall in business investment in Scotland. That is the price of Brexit. It does not matter whether it is this Brexit or another Brexit—the analysis shows that all forms of Brexit will harm Scotland’s economy and result in lower household incomes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-20-commons.u44	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-12-20	Blackford, Ian	Scotland rejects damaging Brexit legislation	2019-12-20 00:00:00	2019-12-20 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-10-commons	The Cambridge-Milton Keynes-Oxford arc has been a major project that the Government have been considering for some years, but the detail seems to have been lost in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Department for Transport. The highly unpopular road link has been paused for a year and there is still no clarity on whether the east-west rail link will be an environmentally friendly electrified line or a diesel line. Can we have a statement from the Minister—some Minister—to provide clarity on this subject?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-10-commons.u251	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-10	Zeichner, Daniel Stephen	Confusion over transport project's future	2020-12-10 00:00:00	2020-12-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons	I thank the Minister for that intervention, because perhaps I was not clear: I was not suggesting that those measures necessarily needed to be in this Bill, but they do need to be set out so that we can place the Bill within the context of the Government’s wider proposals, because the Government—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons.u248	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-13	Blackman-Woods, Roberta Carol	Context for Government's wider proposals	2019-05-13 00:00:00	2019-05-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-27-lords	My Lords, I cast stones at nobody. I agree with the noble and learned Lord that co-operation is always the best route forward and posturing is never helpful. The Christmas alignment arose from a joint meeting at very high level on 2 September, which was followed up by four further high-level conversations. It is an example of co-operation in action.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-27-lords.u33	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-27	True, Nicholas Edward	Co-operation is most effective	2020-11-27 00:00:00	2020-11-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons	Government Members seem to be obsessed with 31 October. That is a pity, because harvest is coming rather sooner, and I wish they would show a similar interest in that. The NFU has made it absolutely clear that we need a permanent, fully functioning system and that at least 10,000 new workers are required in this area. Why will the Government not act, and why will the Home Office not take proper action?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons.u74	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-20	Jones, Susan Elan	Government inaction on agricultural labor	2019-06-20 00:00:00	2019-06-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons	The hon. Lady talks about Labour’s record, and we heard about its plans during the general election to nationalise the broadband network. Is that still the Labour party’s policy, and is the £100 billion figure that BT estimates would be necessary to do that something that she would be prepared to admit to at the Dispatch Box?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons.u297	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-22	Timpson, Anthony Edward	Labour's broadband nationalization policy questioned	2020-01-22 00:00:00	2020-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-lords	My Lords, UK children continue to account for a large proportion of national referral mechanism referrals. Children from overseas who are victims of trafficking may benefit from a grant of leave to remain under a number of different routes, depending on their individual circumstances. Unaccompanied children are only ever returned to their country of origin if safe and adequate reception arrangements are in place.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-lords.u25	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-16	Williams, Susan	Support for trafficked children	2020-11-16 00:00:00	2020-11-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons	The right hon. Gentleman is just wrong. Of course one can want to preserve this deal but be ambitious and, if it is possible, bring the United States and Tehran into a broader rapprochement, dealing not just with the nuclear issue but with the wider destabilising activities. That is the policy that we are pursuing and we are doing so with the US and also, crucially, with our EU partners. There seems to be a bit of amnesia on the Opposition Benches. It was President Macron who last year proposed a very similar approach. Just as we are willing to support that in relation to proposals initiated in Washington, we supported it in relation to Macron. We want to keep the transatlantic alliance together and we want to bring a broader rapprochement between the US and Iran that can lead to a better path for the Iranian people.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons.u205	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-14	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Pursuing US-Iran rapprochement	2020-01-14 00:00:00	2020-01-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-commons	The shadow Secretary of State has touched on a number of issues, stretching from the Kurdish community to Daesh online. I shall try to deal with them in turn What I think is at the heart of the answers to all these questions is that the only way in which we will be able to resolve the problems is through a proper political settlement. Many of the issues raised by the shadow Secretary of State—whether the issue is the minority rights of Yazidis and Christians, or the relationship between Kurds in Syria or Iraq with their national Governments—will have to be resolved in that way. It is very easy to stand at the Dispatch Box and try to talk about an inclusive political settlement, but that is unbelievably difficult to achieve, particularly after eight years of war, deep resentments and a massive militarisation of societies. We see the challenges all the way from Somalia to Yemen, and it will be just as difficult on the Syria-Iraq border, but ultimately that is the only way to resolve these issues, and the more support we can provide for mediators to try to come up with those political solutions, the better off we will all be The hon. Gentleman raised a technical and important question about the purpose of British forces. The reason for our forces on the ground was the Iraqi Government’s request for self-defence against Daesh and Syria, and the justification for their continuing presence is to do with the continuing threat posed by Daesh as a terrorist organisation, but not as a territory-holding organisation. I can, however, reassure the House that the nature of our presence is relatively limited. We are talking about airstrikes many of which are not conducted, the planes not being based in the middle east itself, and we are talking about British troops who are predominantly involved in training operations such as counter-IED and first-aid training. Some are based in the Kurdish regions, others in Iraqi bases. We are talking about a few hundred people. This is not the type of operation that we were talking about in relation to Iraq or Afghanistan, and I therefore do not think that a whole new mandate is necessary I share the hon. Gentleman’s frustration that a debate on an issue as important as this should be so poorly attended in the House of Commons. I hope that our sense of seriousness as a nation means that the next time such a statement is made, people will engage more in the debate. Idlib is a source of huge concern. DFID has put £80 million into humanitarian support in Idlib, but it remains true that the populations in Idlib are under a ferocious and brutal attack from the Syrian Government. It remains very difficult to access people within Idlib, and we continue through every mechanism to call on both the Syrian Government and their supporters, including their supporters from Russia, to exercise restraint, but our options have been very limited and we need to do so in a way that does not repeat the mistakes made in the past of laying down red lines that we cannot maintain or raising the hopes of communities in ways that we cannot vindicate or justify This brings me to the question of resettlement in Iraq and the 55,000 suspected Daesh fighters and their families and social media. All that is leading up to a much bigger issue: there are clearly some legal issues raised, and there are consular and human rights issues raised, but at the heart of all this has to be the question of Daesh mark 2, or in other words, how we prevent all the same conditions—all the same resentments, all the same abuses, all the same lack of public services and all the same corruption—that led to the emergence of Daesh in its first form back in 2004-5 and its new form of 2011-12 from re-emerging again. We have to work with the Iraqi Government and with those areas of Syria controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces to ensure that people’s rights are respected, that reconstruction money is going in and above all that Sunni Arabs feel they have a stake in a political settlement, whereas at the moment they often feel deeply excluded by the regimes, by the ethnicity of the regimes and by the sectarian allegiances of the regimes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-commons.u250	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Stewart, Roderick James Nugent	Call for political settlement in Iraq	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. The cat is out of the bag: on his own admission this motion does not take no deal off the table. I will be guided by you, Mr Speaker, but my understanding was that at the Dispatch Box this House was given a guarantee that today we would have the opportunity to take no deal off the table. Will the right hon. Gentleman not only confirm that, Mr Speaker, but also inform us of the following? Is it the case that the Government are offering a free vote on amendment (f) in the name of the right hon. Member for Ashford (Damian Green), which Mr Speaker has selected, yet they are whipping against amendment (a) in the name of the right hon. Member for Meriden (Dame Caroline Spelman)? [Interruption. ] Conservative Members do not want to hear it, but it is a shameful carry-on when a former chairman of the Conservative party is whipped against to the extent that she will not press that amendment to the vote. This House will be denied the chance to take no deal off the table; that is the truth of it, isn’t it?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u295	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Soubry, Anna Mary	No-deal not removed	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	I am sure everybody will be delighted that my right hon. Friend is back in this House in such robust form. He will be pleased to know that almost 50% of the children in Gloucestershire who qualify are back at school now, but their education has suffered over the past few months. Will he consider therefore doing two things? First, will he ask all teachers to set all their children and pupils a catch-up plan before the summer? Secondly, will he ask all headteachers to get a recovery plan so that everybody can go back in September?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u106	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Robert	Requesting catch-up plans for students	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-lords	My noble friend will be aware of the prioritisation list published by the JVCI. I am afraid that the over-50s, of which I am a member, are not highest on the list, but they are at least halfway down. Prioritisation starts with the over-80s and works down from there. I completely endorse my noble friend’s comments on dispensing doctors. We will be relying on all parts of the healthcare ecology to deliver the vaccine. It will be a massive national project. Getting to hard-to-reach rural communities is incredibly important, particularly people in those communities who are older and perhaps do not travel. Dispensing doctors pay a pivotal role in that, and I pay tribute to their contribution to the vaccine.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-lords.u319	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-12	Bethell, James	Vaccine prioritisation and rural delivery	2020-11-12 00:00:00	2020-11-12 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-lords	Well, my Lords, we have had to wait quite some time for the Secretary of State to respond to the concerns of pupils, parents, school leaders and trade unions, all of whom have been seeking clarity on how next summer’s exams can be conducted fairly. We welcome many of the measures announced in the Statement, which will mitigate the impact of the pandemic, including those on SATs and the delay in Ofsted resuming its inspections, but we believe that the measures announced on GCSEs and A-levels do not go far enough and leave a number of issues to be resolved. The first concern is the Government’s apparent belief that a one-size-fits-all approach is appropriate. Why should that be the case? The changes being proposed will apply to all students, so everyone will know about the topics to be covered, everyone will be able to bring in certain aids, everyone will be graded more generously and so on. Significant numbers of pupils have been and will continue to be absent from school due to Covid, causing disruption to their education. The pattern across the country is uneven, and students’ experiences have been different, so how can making changes that apply to everyone specifically help those who have had the most challenging experiences and therefore need more support One size fits all will lead to fundamental inequities between students who have suffered different levels of disruption to their learning, and makes it inevitable that some young people will be examined on what they have not been taught rather than what they have been taught. This is an issue that the interim chief regulator of Ofqual has red-flagged, highlighting the gap in learning loss across different regions, describing it as “one of the most intractable issues”, with any potential solutions “fraught with difficulty” The Minister may point to this as being within the remit of the expert group, but with someone as experienced as the head of Ofqual saying it is close to being unmanageable, does the Minister believe there is a solution to be found? If there is not, the question of whether the exams can ever be fair for pupils in the hardest-hit Covid areas must be addressed I mentioned the expert group, but we have had relatively little information on it. Why has it been established so late? Who will comprise the group and will it include representatives of school leaders and teachers? Most importantly, when is it expected to report? Additionally, will minutes of its meetings be published, as now happens with SAGE? Will its members, like those who comprise the DfE’s Covid-19 recovery advisory group, be required to sign non-disclosure agreements? That would be completely unacceptable at a time when concerned parents and pupils surely deserve transparency on discussions about their future. How will the Secretary of State ensure that the distribution of grades is spread evenly across schools and postcodes this year, so that the most disadvantaged pupils are treated fairly? We still do not know which parts of the syllabus will be in the exam papers and which will not, leaving schools less and less time to adjust their teaching programmes A further concern is why it has now been revealed that funding for catch-up tutoring will be spread across two years. Apparently, around £140 million of the £350 million allocated to the national tutoring programme remains unspent. That might not have been the case had the programme not taken so long to begin its work but, given the widely accepted disparity in the amount of education that school pupils have been able to access since the start of the pandemic, surely every available resource should be used to ensure that every pupil is prepared for this year’s exams, rather than rolling over that part of the funding into next year, because for some that will be too late. The Minister may point to the separate catch-up fund, but that does not justify holding back resources already allocated for spending in this financial year, particularly when it is so critical that they reach those young people most in need. Students should have the opportunity to show what they have achieved in unprecedented circumstances. Despite the delay, these proposals fall short of what is required to facilitate the fair exams that the Secretary of State promised.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-lords.u116	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-08	Watson, Michael Goodall	Unfair exam measures during pandemic	2020-12-08 00:00:00	2020-12-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-commons	Yes, I am saying that, but that is also what the National Farmers Union is saying. It is also what the Institute for Government has pointed out. A number of other bodies have pointed out that this is just not necessary. We have something that we could work with, with co-operation, but of course, the UK Government do not want co-operation, consultation and working together. They just want to impose their will, and that is what they are trying to do again. This Bill not only undermines the basic foundations of devolution but goes further, hitting all existing mechanisms for co-operation and the development of common frameworks. It is not this abomination that is required; it is the establishment of the common frameworks mutually agreed, developed and implemented through consent, with effective governance and processes for regulatory impact.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-commons.u262	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-15	Hendry, Andrew Egan Henderson	UK Government undermines devolution mechanisms	2020-09-15 00:00:00	2020-09-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons	I am very happy to congratulate my hon. Friend on all the work that he has done for his constituency and more widely. He is absolutely right: UK Export Finance is an essential part of the Government support that can be provided to exporters. I am very pleased that the Department for International Trade has changed the rules to enable UK Export Finance to provide support for some smaller exporters, which has encouraged them. UKEF provides a vital role in our economy and our exporting around the world, and I am happy to congratulate it on the work that it does.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons.u125	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-17	May, Theresa Mary	Praise for UK Export Finance	2019-07-17 00:00:00	2019-07-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-27-commons	What a pleasure it is to contribute to this debate while in my isolation that I am still under, which meant that I could not accept the invitation to be in the Chamber today. I have one very quick point to make on the background of this debate. The Finance Bill, more or less like the Queen’s Speech, was redundant almost before the print had dried, because we are in a situation we could not have imagined when either was first framed I want to make a pitch in particular for an unrepresented group in our society: children and young people. I believe that young people—school leavers, children in school and children in pre-school—have had a pretty tough time during this coronavirus epidemic, and they are still having a tough time. Looking forward, we are going to see real problems. If we have the recession that every authority is predicting, we will have a very serious problem of youth unemployment, and young people will have to accept jobs that they would not otherwise have dreamed of accepting. We have to concentrate and modify at every level to prepare for that great demand, and we must amend the Finance Bill, because we have a responsibility to look after young people well When I first came into Parliament all those years ago in 1981, everyone was surprised when Margaret Thatcher, the new Conservative Prime Minister, introduced a windfall profit tax on the banks, because they had made money while doing very little about it. I want this Bill to be amended very soon to include a windfall profit tax on those who have done rather well, even though they did not plot or plan it. I am thinking of Amazon, Google, Netflix and the gambling sector, all of which are ripe for a windfall tax that could be distributed to look after young people One way to do that would be to learn from the Americans—from the Kennedys and the peace corps—and give young people at 18, at 21 or at any stage of their lives the chance to go and serve the community abroad or at home. I would like us to take a bit of that, and perhaps a bit of the green apprenticeship in Germany, and create a new green national service. It would give every young person in our country an opportunity—at the age of 16, 18, 21 or whenever they chose—to spend a year working on climate change and the environment. We need the money to do that, and I think a windfall profit tax would be the way I believe that that would go some small way to addressing the unfairness of the taxation system, which other colleagues have spoken about eloquently. In Huddersfield, the typical town of Britain, we know that very well. We know that universities, which are the heartbeat of many communities such as mine, will be under threat in the coming months and years. We need to focus on young people, education and higher education, and we need a windfall tax to give us the resources and the opportunity to do something substantial rapidly in the coming months and years.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-27-commons.u194	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-04-27	Sheerman, Barry John	Support windfall tax for youth	2020-04-27 00:00:00	2020-04-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons	Without a roof over one’s head, it is very difficult to get a job or to claim benefits. Without a job, it is almost impossible to afford rent, so what is my right hon. Friend going to do to ensure that universal credit claimants are helped and assisted not only to get a roof over their heads but to get back into work?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons.u53	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-13	Blackman, Robert John	Support for housing and employment	2019-05-13 00:00:00	2019-05-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords	My Lords, this has been an extremely thought-provoking debate from the outset. This is a measure which is designed, at this stage, to manage 19 wild animals, but we have gone into a wider debate as well. It is very important from the Government’s point of view to acknowledge the contributions from the noble Baronesses, Lady Mallalieu and Lady Bakewell, the noble Lord, Lord Trees, and my noble friend Lady Byford, with all her farming experience There was concern about whether this could in any way be considered the first phase or step towards addressing what were described by the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell, as “legitimate” activities. As she said that, I thought about “One Man and His Dog”, falconry displays and, as a farmer, the grand parades at county shows, as well as the respect, love and responsibility we have for our animals. As a country person, the distinction I place is that this measure relates to the use of wild animals in travelling circuses. I want to place it on record that I utterly reject the extreme actions of those who believe that intimidation is how to get their way. I am absolutely certain that all noble Lords who spoke in this debate would not for one minute think that intimidation was the right way forward. We have thought of this as being the right way forward over time. Indeed, it was in my party’s manifesto and I rather think it was in the Labour and Liberal Democrat manifestos. We have reached a time when we have an expression or a feeling that the use of wild animals in travelling circuses for our entertainment is not appropriate for those animals. I have no doubt about what the two circus operators have said, on record, about their regard and love for those animals. As I said, the animals were found to have been well cared for in welfare inspections This is about whether we should be thinking much more about wild animals having what I would describe as their natural behaviour and expression. I support this Bill for those reasons. I agree with my noble friend Lady Byford that this is about seeing wild animals in their proper environments. I put on record, in response to the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, that we do not see this Bill as having unintended consequences. This is a measure that we thought should be introduced. We have thought that for some while; indeed, my noble friend Lady Byford referred to her endeavours in the 2006 parliamentary skirmishes. I should say to my noble friend Lady Anelay that this measure relates to England. The Welsh Government are bringing forward their own proposals and the Scottish Government have already gone forward The noble Baronesses, Lady Mallalieu and Lady Jones of Whitchurch, referred to the tigers and elephants of yesteryear. Indeed, there are circuses on the continent that still use these types of animals. The point is that without this legislation they could be reintroduced even under the current licensing regime. The Bill does not just stop the use of the 19 wild animals in question, it prevents others being added in the future—that is the point I should make The noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, asked why the use of wild animals in travelling circuses is to be banned. Again, I ask whether these performances add anything to our understanding of conservation of wild animals. I go back to their natural behaviour. I think that wild animals in circuses, whether they are trained well or not, are trained for our entertainment and amusement. I am interested in what the noble Lord, Lord Trees, said about this and I am conscious of his veterinary expertise and the points made about the BVA, but that is my distinction A number of points were made about other legislation in the pipeline and the desire for it. I say to the noble Baronesses, Lady Jones of Whitchurch and Lady Mallalieu, that I am fully seized of our commitment to increase sentences. This is something we wish to attend to and to introduce as soon as possible. I will say, because many of us are engaged, that Finn’s law, which has achieved Royal Assent, has very much strengthened the protection of animals. We are going to have a statutory instrument next week. In truth, we can have a bit of a political knockabout, but the noble Lord, Lord Trees, is right: actually, this Government have brought forward many modernising measures to ensure that animals are better cared for. On the point of sentience raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, we have been clear that we will introduce our animal sentience proposals after we leave the EU. The fate of the 19 was raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu. She used the term “get rid of them”. Actually, that is absolutely not what I understand from the operators of both circuses, who have placed it on record that the animals would either be rehomed, retired to their winter quarters or used in other work—for instance, there is television and film work. That will certainly not be banned by this legislation, which is about the use of wild animals in travelling circuses. It is right to acknowledge, as I do, that circus operators have placed on record their care for these animals: they have even referred to them as part of the family. So their future has been assured and that is important, because some are quite young. I was looking at the ages at some of the animals. Given the length of their captivity, some of them have a very long lifespan left I disagree, if I have it right, with the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, on the use of animals such as dogs and horses in circuses and racing, provided that it is respectful and that animal welfare measures are there. We have, as the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Whitchurch, said, some of the most impressive animal welfare legislation in the world. If there is no use for animals, they will no longer be bred. As we have unfortunately a much more mechanised world, many of the animals that we used for very heavy-duty work are no longer required—and thank goodness. We need to be thinking about the manner in which we use and respect them On the definition of “wild”, I would say to my noble friend Lady Fookes and the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, that we have sought to use an approach that is consistent with other legislation and the definition of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, as I said in my opening remarks. It is important to be consistent. The noble Lord, Lord Trees, and other noble Lords asked about the definition of “travelling circuses”. We have given this a lot of thought; indeed, the Scottish Government have also chosen not to define “circus” in their Act. We think that prescribing a definition of “circus” would open up the possible risk of future circus operators seeking to avoid prohibition Indeed, a contrary but wider view is that we also do not wish to prohibit wider ranges of activity than are strictly intended by the travelling circus. So the common-sense approach is to draw up clear guidance. The noble Baronesses, Lady Jones of Whitchurch and Lady Bakewell, quite rightly said from the Opposition Benches, “Come on, we want a timescale on this”. I can confirm that we will publish guidance to the Bill by 20 November, two months before the ban comes into effect. We are working on that and it is obviously important. My noble friend Lady Fookes, who is experienced in this, raised the point about guidance; as in Scotland, we do not intend the guidance to be statutory, but it must and will provide clarity on the terms used in the Bill and aid enforcement. Obviously, as with all these things, ultimately this will be determined by the courts—but the common-sense approach of our guidance will help My noble friend Lady Anelay also raised the question of Northern Ireland. As we all know, this is a devolved matter, and in the absence of a Government in Northern Ireland Defra officials spoke to officials in the Northern Ireland Administration. Those officials believed that, “practical, administrative and policy considerations”, meant that they did not feel that they wanted to participate in the Bill. However, I should say that at this time there are no travelling circuses touring Northern Ireland with wild animals, and the Republic of Ireland banned travelling circuses with wild animals last year. So officials felt that these considerations should wait until Ministers were back in place in Northern Ireland—and, of course, we all very much want the return of devolved arrangements in Northern Ireland My noble friend Lady Anelay also queried in a sense whether the two licensed travelling circuses could move to Northern Ireland. For these few months it is obviously a possible suggestion. That said, neither has travelled to Northern Ireland; that may well be to do with the costs involved and the distance from their winter quarters. Of course, animal welfare legislation in Northern Ireland would cover the welfare of any wild mammals there until such time as the Administration took a decision on whether to ban the use of wild animals in circuses. However, we have devolution and must respect that settlement, although the message is clear; the Republic has banned them, Wales is about to and Scotland already has. This is our legislative measure There are a number of other points. My noble friend Lady Anelay asked about seizure. The powers of seizure in the Bill are reserved for those powers necessary to prove the offence. We would never need to seize a wild animal to prove the offence, so we think that such a power would be disproportionate. If it were necessary to seize an animal in distress, Sections 18 and 19 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 already provide the appropriate powers. Indeed, Section 4 of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 would also allow an unlicensed dangerous animal, as listed in that legislation, to be seized My noble friend Lady Anelay and the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell, referred to international matters. I wish to record that my noble friend did so much during her term at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to protect the planet’s most iconic species. Last year we hosted the largest ever illegal wildlife trade conference, bring together more than 70 countries. We are spending £26 million to protect and support wildlife across the globe The noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell, asked about enforcement powers. Interestingly, it is a small Bill with a big schedule on enforcement. The Bill provides inspectors with powers to search for and gather evidence of an offence. Defra has approximately 50 inspectors appointed for zoo inspections, as I said. Several of them inspect the two circuses currently licensed by Defra to use wild animals. All inspectors are either qualified veterinarians or have extensive experience of working with captive animals. They will be experienced in identifying and, if need be, handling species of wild animal. We can draw on the existing list of inspectors if there is ever any need to gather evidence to prove the offence in the Bill. The offence will apply only to the operator of the circus—that is, the person with overall responsibility for the circus. On the question of police constables, again, if an animal is in distress, the Animal Welfare Act already provides powers for the police to respond quickly. The schedule provides powers to search for evidence of the offence contained in Clause 1. This includes taking up to two persons with them on an inspection. Of course, one or both of those persons could be a police constable. Enforcement of Bills such as this often requires a specialism in wild animals—but, as I said, there is every opportunity, if need be, for a police constable to be part of that The noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Whitchurch, queried what might happen in these last months. Again, we believe that it is very unlikely that such tours could happen. I shall expand a bit on why. Travelling circuses tour during the summer months and typically return to their winter quarters at the end of October each year. Acquiring new animals and training them to perform a specific routine, which takes time, would normally occur at the winter quarters. It is therefore very unlikely that circuses would change their routine and add new animals to their performances mid-term and mid-tour. Given that a ban will be in place before the next touring season, it would make very little economic sense for circus owners to invest in new animals, enclosures and equipment now. Indeed, if they were to do so, there would have been nothing to stop them doing so before this touring season commenced The Government made clear when they published the review of interim licensing regulations that no more licences would be issued after January 2020. I assure the noble Baroness and your Lordships that, since the Bill was introduced on 1 May, we have had no queries from circuses about introducing further wild animals before the end of this touring season This debate has been thought provoking. In many cases it has gone beyond what might happen to the 19 animals. It has included issues about the use of animals both wild and domesticated. I again say emphatically that the Government’s intent in this legislation is not to embark on further approaches to what we have all said on record are legitimate activities that respect animals. I beg to move.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords.u96	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-19	Gardiner, John Eric	Ban wild animals in circuses	2019-06-19 00:00:00	2019-06-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons	We have been given these choices: deal or no deal; and then deal or no Brexit. We now face a situation of chaos. One million people or more will probably be marching over the weekend to ask for the right to have a final say. The Government say that they are implementing the will of the people. If their deal is the will of the people, they should put it to the people to decide. We cannot agree in this place. We voted down this deal by 230 and then by149, and often for opposite reasons. One set of people say that we are not aligned enough with the EU, and the other that we are too much aligned with the EU. We cannot agree, so the deal should be put to the people. If this deal represents the will of the people, the people should decide This debate is about how long the extension should be. I put it to the Government that we should be requesting at least 22 weeks—five months—to allow time for a referendum. We probably could do with nine months if we are to look at the options. However, there is a real risk that the Government will go forward without a purpose, and we will simply be rejected by the EU, which will then force us into a situation where we will have either to take a no deal or to revoke article 50. In those circumstances, I very much hope that the Government choose to revoke article 50, because the people want to carry on with business as usual and not to have to face chaos In Swansea, people who voted leave voted in good faith for more money, more control, more trade, and more jobs. They are telling me now that they did not vote leave to leave their jobs. They can see that they will not get the trade and they can see that they will not get the control. They will not get the money, because there is a divorce bill. It is a complete shambles. People are not getting what they want. The Government are not representing the leave voters in Swansea and those voters now want the final say and they deserve that final say. That is what democracy is all about. Democracy is the right to change one’s mind. People are dying for that. Keynes famously said: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do? ” The facts have changed. When we had that vote, we did not have Donald Trump running around threatening people and undermining trade deals, environmental deals and world security. We did not have the Chinese getting rid of their democracy. We will be smashed between those two powers when we are trying to secure trade deals. We need to be part of Europe and share the values of Europe—of human rights, the rule of law and democracy. We need to work together in an uncertain world. People have woken up to the fact that that means staying in the EU. It is all very well having these stupid populist sayings, such as “take back control” and all the rest of it. People may have voted for that, but they now realise that they are losing control. There are those who say, “Oh, well, people will be angry. ” The fact is that people will be absolutely enraged when they lose their jobs We are seeing the outbreak of populism, fascism and violence. The Daily Mail reported a case of a woman who was beaten to a pulp by people who said, “You’re from Poland, go home. ” This is what is happening as a result of Brexit. It must be stopped. The people demand a final say and it is our duty to deliver it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons.u530	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-20	Davies, Geraint Richard	People deserve final Brexit say	2019-03-20 00:00:00	2019-03-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons	I will come on to fishing and agriculture, but when I am talking about the principles and what the European Union has meant for peace and stability, that is the response that we get from the Conservatives. Frankly, that is telling. I am amazed that the right hon. Gentleman, for whom I have respect, has lowered himself to a situation where he is talking about fishing when we are talking about the peace and stability that the European Union has brought us We have not yet left the European Union, yet we already have a preview of the Prime Minister’s contempt for democracy and lack of respect for the rule of law. Leaving the European Union risks the protection, rights and values that have made our democracy possible. The rights that we have all shared as EU citizens—to live, to work and to receive an education in each member state—are about to be torn from us if this Government get their way. They are rights that perhaps many of us have taken for granted. The great right of freedom of movement is to be stopped by a Government whose warped sense somehow sees this as a victory.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons.u89	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-14	Blackford, Ian	EU exit risks rights and stability	2019-10-14 00:00:00	2019-10-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons	I continue to argue for the Prime Minister’s agreement, and that is where I think we should head. People talk about a compromise; that is the best compromise, and it is the one that my hon. Friend and I have both voted for I am astonished that the Labour Front Benchers are supporting the idea of handing over our trade policy. They were the people most passionately against TTIP, and other trade agreements, due to the access that it would supposedly have given foreign companies to the NHS. As it happens, I do not buy into that idea, but the idea that it will now be fine because we are handing over trade policy to the EU without having a seat at the table is for the birds. I think it was Senator Elizabeth Warren who said, “If you don’t have a seat at the table, you’re probably on the menu. ” That is exactly what I fear will happen in an EU customs union if motion (C) is passed this evening.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons.u440	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-01	Hands, Gregory William	Support PM's trade policy	2019-04-01 00:00:00	2019-04-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons	Anybody who has any experience of local government—my hon. Friend does, as do I and many others in here—knows that three or four years down the road, though they hint at looking again at business rates, Ministers will come along and tell everybody in local government, “You’re profligate, you’re spending too much, so we’ll cap you. ” As I am sure he will remember, we have had all this before.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons.u243	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-13	Cunningham, James Dolan	Predictable rate caps in future	2019-05-13 00:00:00	2019-05-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would be grateful if you could correct or confirm my recollection. I do not know what anybody else expected, but I did not necessarily expect any motion to carry a majority today, certainly not the one I proposed, which, if I recall, has had almost an identical result to the one it had the last time it was moved in this House. My understanding of the procedure instigated by the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin) was that we would first let 1,000 flowers bloom and see where we went, that that would expose some things that had perhaps little support, and that then we would seek to proceed to see whether ranking things in an order of importance made a difference I have to say to the Secretary of State that I thought it was somewhat extraordinary for him to come to the Dispatch Box and say that this proves that the only thing to do is go ahead with the Prime Minister’s motion, which got fewer votes than many motions that have been before us tonight. So perhaps you would tell me, Mr Speaker, whether my recollection, which seems to differ from that of some colleagues, is reasonably accurate.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons.u599	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-27	Beckett, Margaret Mary	Clarification on vote expectations requested	2019-03-27 00:00:00	2019-03-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords	My Lords, may I declare an experience, as the co-ordinator of the 2010 strategic defence and security review? Does the Minister agree that good strategy is about choosing and prioritising? Does she accept that one of the most crucial aspects of this review is that it should start with a clear statement of the Government’s vision for Britain’s role in the world—a realistic role that gets beyond the slogan of “global Britain”?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords.u53	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-04	Ricketts, Peter	Strategic defense prioritization needed	2020-03-04 00:00:00	2020-03-04 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As I said, this is a Government in denial about the root causes of high and rising homelessness, and she puts her finger on a very important root cause. It used to be the case that government in Britain was based on evidence—we had evidence-based policy making—but all the evidence about universal credit is that it leads to higher levels of debt and higher levels of rent arrears, and of course higher levels of rent arrears lead to higher levels of homelessness.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons.u270	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-29	Healey, John	Government denial of homelessness causes	2020-01-29 00:00:00	2020-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	I should explain that in these exceptional circumstances, although the Chair of the Committee would normally sit in the Clerk’s Chair during the Committee stage, in order to comply with social distancing requirements I will remain in the Speaker’s Chair although I will be carrying out the role not of Deputy Speaker but of Chairman of the Committee. If Members obey the rules to the letter, the occupant of the Chair at this time should be addressed not as Deputy Speaker but as Chairman of the Committee. Just before we commence, I should inform the Committee that there has been a production error on the amendment paper. The names of Bob Blackman and Nick Fletcher should not have been published in support of new clause 4 and new clause 5 Clause 1 Divorce: removal of requirement to establish facts etc	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u330	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Role clarification Committee stage	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords	My Lords, I am also grateful to my noble friend Lady Jolly for securing this debate and her clarity in opening it. We have had an excellent and, so far, unanimous debate In a humane society, unqualified practitioners may not set themselves up as doctors and dentists to practise medicine or dentistry without training, supervision or regulation, as the noble Baroness, Lady Murphy, and others have eloquently argued. We now promise, and are promised, parity of esteem between mental and physical health, which the Mental Health Foundation defines as “valuing mental health equally with physical health”, with commitments for “equal access to the most effective and safest care and treatment … equal efforts to improve the quality of care … equal status within healthcare education and practice” If those commitments are to be more than glib platitudes, we must end the scandal of untrained and unregulated self-styled therapists, counsellors, healers or life coaches peddling untested and dubious treatment to the psychologically and emotionally vulnerable and suffering We have heard harrowing accounts of victims, often young, brainwashed by unscrupulous and controlling individuals. These charlatans play on their clients’ suffering, deluding them into a false belief in their treatment, often conjuring up in them fake memories about their early years and inducing unhealthy long-term dependence on the therapist and rejection of families and friends. For this, they often take significant fees and frequently inflict devastating and long-term damage. This debate has pointed the way to what is needed First, we must insist on licensing and regulation for therapists, for which my noble friend Lord Alderdice and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, have long argued. We need an approved body that maintains a register of practitioner members, who must secure qualifications, comply with a clear statement of ethical standards and submit to supervision Secondly, I support the call by the noble Lord, Lord Astor, the charity Family Survival Trust chaired by Tom Sackville—a former Home Office Minister, who is here tonight—and leading academics in seeking amendment to the Serious Crime Act 2015, which outlaws controlling or coercive behaviour, but in a domestic context only, where perpetrator and victim are in an intimate personal relationship or live together as family members. The Act needs to go wider to cover so-called therapists causing psychological damage and distress to their clients and their clients’ families and friends. Such legislation would be simple and effective. Will the Government bring forward such an amendment to the Act now?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords.u236	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-02	Marks, Jonathan	Regulate therapists, amend Serious Crime Act	2020-03-02 00:00:00	2020-03-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-lords	My Lords, like a number of noble Lords, I have walked on both sides of the street as a Minister and as a member of the Diplomatic Service. I can testify to the significance to both sides of having frank and unblemished advice from our ambassadors. However, when I became a member of the Diplomatic Service, I was subjected to detailed, developed vetting, to the extent that a bank account my mother had opened when I was eight was uncovered. I am not aware of any equivalent vetting when I became a Minister. Will the Minister give the House a guarantee that, should it transpire that a politician was responsible for these leaks, action will be taken against that politician with the full force of the law in such a way as to ensure that we are not bandying around terms such as “honourable” and “right honourable” without any honour being present?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-lords.u129	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-08	Liddell, Helen Lawrie	Call for action against leakers	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-lords	My Lords, I echo my noble friend Lord Liddle in applauding the Minister on his approach and attitude. Is it not worth celebrating the involvement and success of Turkey, Germany and Belgium in getting this vaccine to the UK? We did not order all the vaccines so early. During the next few weeks, the Health Secretary has to be the most trusted voice of Government as he rightly seeks to persuade people to take the vaccine. How can he perform this role when he has uttered a string of untruths? The latest is that the medicines regulator could only work fast because of Brexit. This is untrue and everybody knows it. I hope this problem of trust can be restored because the advice given by the Secretary of State will be crucial to the take-up of the vaccine.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-lords.u126	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-03	Rooker, Jeffrey	Minister's trust issue with vaccine	2020-12-03 00:00:00	2020-12-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons	When the public inquiry reports after being able to properly consider these events, there will be an almost irresistible urge to blame. That can only be natural, for we will as a nation feel grief—grief for those we have lost, grief for the things we have hitherto taken for granted, and grief for lost futures. The inquiry will demand papers, examine plans, ask awkward questions and reveal uncomfortable truths. There will be admissions, denials and rebuttals, claim and counterclaim, good days for some, bad days for others. There will be tales of heroism, and records of blunder. There will be examples of those who did not make reply, those who should have perhaps reasoned why, and, above it all, the lingering ghosts of those who simply did and died The findings of the inquiry will not be phrased poetically. They will be categoric. I will wait for them and accept them, and we will all learn from them. The findings will put aside examples of hindsight-itis, which grow as the real pandemic subsides. Those who say they do not wish to play politics but then subtly do so will be able to deal in the facts, rather than propagate speculation. We will know who knew what and when, from whence this virus came, and myriad hows and whys will find their answer. We know it on reasonable authority that judgment is never quite so harsh upon the admission of responsibility, but perhaps most painfully of all there may be some answers we may never know There are some people for whom our Prime Minister will never do anything right, but he is the Prime Minister and they are not. He knows that to govern is to choose. There are invidious choices ahead, and we need the Government to be fully engaged with the concerns and suggestions of wider society. They must also be engaged with this House, and I am sorry to say that this format of a virtual Parliament does not allow for it. As we ask our constituents to return to their place of work, with understandable anxieties and adaptations, so we must lead by example and return to ours Through effective scrutiny we will get better government, for there are many candid friends of the Government in this House who want them to succeed on behalf of our entire nation. However, just as the Prime Minister and Ministers must exercise their judgment carefully and clearly, it is also for everyone to play a part in exercising our judgment, rather than entirely abdicating responsibility to the state. Although the state intervention has been great and necessary, it will be our individual patience, good sense and, above all, humanity that will see us through Much has been made of the slogan used to convey the Government’s message. Supposedly clever people scoff and feign confusion. Well, we can argue about this weekend’s communication strategy and wish it were better, but ultimately we must have greater confidence in the judgment of the public.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons.u289	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-11	Wragg, William Peter	Inquiry inevitable, grief, government scrutiny	2020-05-11 00:00:00	2020-05-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-26-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for that question. It does worry me that this House seems consistently to agree on what it does not want but fails to grasp what it does want. If we could take some of the energy around the semantics of obeying the law and put it into getting a deal done, I think this Parliament would be held in greater respect than it is currently by the country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-26-commons.u51	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-26	Duddridge, James Philip	Focus on getting deal done	2019-09-26 00:00:00	2019-09-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons	My hon. Friend is making an excellent point about PIP assessments. Epilepsy Scotland says that 77% of those who appealed when they lost out on their PIP won on appeal. The DWP denied PIP to over 53% of people living with epilepsy who had previously had DLA, so this absolutely bears out my hon. Friend’s point that those with particular conditions such as epilepsy are not being well served by the system.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons.u349	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-05	Thewliss, Alison Emily	PIP assessment system failures	2019-06-05 00:00:00	2019-06-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-19-commons	Clearly, tackling this virus in care homes is a very difficult thing, but the chief executive of Hertfordshire Care Providers Association is on record as saying that care providers in the county feel well supported during the pandemic. Does the Secretary of State agree that what is required to achieve this, as in Hertfordshire, is a very close working relationship—a partnership—between care homes, the councils, the Care Quality Commission and, of course, the clinical commissioning groups?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-19-commons.u138	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-19	Heald, Oliver	Supportive partnership in care homes	2020-05-19 00:00:00	2020-05-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster may recall that the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, representing the UK auto industry, described the prospect of a no-deal Brexit as an “existential threat” to their sector. Nobody could complain that they have not made preparations for a no-deal Brexit—they have spent millions of pounds in so doing—but I have not heard them say anything that indicates that they have changed their mind about the severity of the threat they face in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Has he?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u470	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Burden, Richard Haines	Auto industry's no-deal Brexit concerns	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	One can see why, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the amendment moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Thornton, would be attractive, as it focuses our minds on restoring reciprocal healthcare arrangements with the EU 27, other EEA countries and Switzerland. As I said on Second Reading, a disproportionate number of UK citizens benefit from the S1 scheme compared with EU citizens in the UK, so there is much to lose in a no-deal scenario In March 2018, the UK reached an agreement in principle with the EU on the implementation period which would ensure continuation of the current reciprocal healthcare rights until 31 December 2020. If we crash out, there has to be a plan B which allows us to consider reciprocal healthcare arrangements with other countries. Although I understand the need to write “international arrangements” into the Bill, it presents problems. They were identified by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, as mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Jolly, which described as “fanciful” the idea of providing the Secretary of State with wide powers to fund the costs of healthcare anywhere in the world—for example, as the noble Baroness described, mental health provision in Arizona or all hip replacements in Australia This is far too wide, and the focus of international arrangements should in the first instance be applied to Britain’s 13 overseas territories, far-flung as they are—some in the Falklands and the Galapagos, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, stated—but the closest of which is Gibraltar: close to us and close to Europe. Ninety-six per cent of Gibraltarians voted to remain in the EU, and our focus should be to ensure reciprocal healthcare for those overseas countries for which we have responsibility. Post Brexit, whatever the arrangements are, we can then think about the wider international arrangements; but for now, we should focus on the areas for which we have responsibility I hope that my noble friend can provide assurances as to how best to protect the overseas territories in the event of no deal and give further consideration to what the Government intend “international arrangements” to cover.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u103	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Ribeiro, Bernard Francisco	Focus on reciprocal healthcare arrangements	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons	I appreciate the efforts the Home Secretary is making in describing the wonderful work that a very few limited projects are doing, but I would suggest that they benefit—and I am sure that they do benefit—a relatively small number of young people When I was lead member for children and youth services in Hounslow about 12 years ago, I was told by young people, including so-called vulnerable young people, that they appreciated the good, specialist work that youth workers and others were doing with them, but they did not want to go into a facility with other young people and be labelled vulnerable. They wanted to participate in a universal youth facility, to be seen as part of the crowd, and perhaps to do some specific work, as and when, with those specialist workers. Effectively, the only youth work that is currently being done is for those so-called vulnerable young people. They feel labelled and separated from others, because the universal provision has all but disappeared in most of our local authorities.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons.u277	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-15	Cadbury, Ruth Margaret	Critique of youth services provision	2019-05-15 00:00:00	2019-05-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons	With the permission of the House, motions 4 to 6 will be taken together. Before I call the Leader of the House to move the first motion, and speak to all three motions, I confirm that the Speaker has selected amendment (a) to motion 5 in its corrected form. I will call amendment (a) to motion 6, if amendment (a) to motion 5 is agreed to. The selected amendments will be debated together with the three motions, and the questions necessary to dispose of the motions will be put at the end of the debate. Colleagues will see that a number of Members wish to speak, so I intend to impose a five-minute limit on Back-Bench contributions.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons.u381	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-23	Winterton, Rosalie	Motions and amendment debate procedures	2020-06-23 00:00:00	2020-06-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons	I will start where the hon. Member for Wirral South (Alison McGovern) finished, but before I do I congratulate both Front Benchers on, if I may use a sporting analogy, being thrown in the deep end in order to take the Bill through. They both spoke really well about the importance of the games and of the Bill. They also both look very fit and well following the dreadful lockdown, which has affected us all. I may be stretching a point, but perhaps we will see them both training in Sutton Park, which will play such an important part in the games. The Bill provides an optimistic and encouraging moment because, as the hon. Lady said, it gives us a chance to look beyond the acute challenges that our country is facing at the moment and is genuinely something to look forward to. Boy, are we going to need it. Quite apart from the games, the sport, the fun and the excitement, all of which mean so much to so many people around the world, for us in the west midlands it is about the boost to our local economy, which we all know we must maximise. It is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create thousands of jobs, new homes and a massive improvement to the public realm At a local level in Sutton Coldfield, we are delighted that our historic park is going to come into active use. It is the place where King Henry VIII used to hunt and where soldiers undertook their training in trench warfare before heading off to the western front in the first world war, and it was also visited by Her Majesty the Queen and 30,000 others to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the scouting movement in 1957. In Sutton Coldfield, we will proudly host the triathlon for the games In a virtual meeting with the leadership team of the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth games, I was pleased to hear about the progress. Nearly three quarters of a billion pounds is involved, and it will leave a tremendous legacy. Locally, I was pleased to hear from the leadership of the Commonwealth games committee that co-operation with Royal Sutton Coldfield Town Council under its leader Simon Ward has been going so well My constituents will hopefully benefit greatly from the improved infrastructure in our park, which I believe is the largest municipal park in Europe. It will improve the facilities to be used, including for future events. The gain is not just for businesses locally, but for jobs, community projects and volunteering. The games will require 10,000 local volunteers to welcome people from all over the Commonwealth, as well as to perform in the opening and closing ceremonies and to host athletes and teams at sporting facilities for training purposes. In Sutton Coldfield, we are deeply grateful for the opportunities and very excited by the prospects We need to ensure, as the Minister made clear, that all the different organisations involved play their part and work together from now on until the games open. I have worked extremely closely over the past three months with Birmingham City Council and, in particular, with the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Liam Byrne). He and I co-chair a committee that tries to bring together all the local interests in order that we can tackle some of the problems that affect us across Birmingham I will leave others to underline the importance of the council’s role and local government, if I may. Instead, I want to refer to the role of the Mayor and the West Midlands Combined Authority, which is absolutely crucial both for the games and for the legacy. I have seen what the London Olympics have done for the east end of London. In particular, through the legacy that went on afterwards, including with the International Inspiration programme chaired by Lord Coe, I saw the huge ability of sport not only to energise children and improve education, also to help health, education and vaccination in the developing world. There is a huge importance to focusing on the legacy that will follow in all its many forms. I salute the efforts of Andy Street, our Mayor. He was teased, I think, by the right hon. Gentleman earlier about the so-called black hole in the budget. I have said to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I have, through the miracles of modern technology, been able to elicit a response from the Mayor. He said this: “There is no black hole. Every year, the West Midlands Combined Authority has lived within its budget—both in-year finances and also within investment ceilings. It has been well managed and for example at last week’s board the annual finance review was fully accepted. Citizens of the west midlands have not paid a penny for a Tory mayor, but over £2 billion of new Government cash has been brought into the region since Andy Street was elected. Yes, we are still short of funds for some investments, but they are steadily closing as further new investment comes in. ” Those are the other words of Andy Street, delivered through me to the House on this important point this afternoon.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons.u379	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-11	Mitchell, Andrew John Bower	Support for Commonwealth Games initiative	2020-06-11 00:00:00	2020-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons	I will move on, if that is all right with the hon. Gentleman These powers are narrowly defined and will be exclusively used on national security grounds. The Government will not be able to use these powers to intervene in business transactions for broader economic or public interest reasons, and we will not seek to interfere in deals on political grounds. They will not and cannot be used for wider economic tests. The Government already have proportionate powers in statute for intervention on the grounds of competition, financial stability, media plurality and combating a public health emergency. Going further than that would risk chilling and destabilising investment in the United Kingdom and reducing growth opportunities and jobs The UK has the lowest corporation tax rate in the G20. We are rated one of the most innovative countries in the world, ranking fourth in the 2020 global innovation index. We are one of the top 10 countries in the world for ease of doing business. We have a world-leading research and development environment, and the stability of our institutions, tax system and legal framework are respected globally. It is because of our pro-market approach that the United Kingdom has become one of the premier places to invest in the world, and I certainly would not want to do anything to change that. The powers we seek in the Bill support and enhance our pro-business environment, supporting economic growth, prosperity and jobs across the United Kingdom, while enhancing security for our country. I commend the Bill to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons.u262	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-17	Sharma, Alok Kumar	Narrow powers for national security	2020-11-17 00:00:00	2020-11-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons	Sadly, there are not just sectoral problems for aerospace. With Bridgend now reeling from the INEOS threat to take jobs elsewhere, it is clear that Wales and the UK face fierce international competition. Can the Secretary of State explain what he and his Government are doing to develop a UK-wide industrial strategy and a trade policy that will help to retain, create and attract the new green jobs of the future?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons.u10	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Griffith, Nia Rhiannon	Calls for UK industrial strategy	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-28-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. He is right to say that this country needs to help developing countries. One of the best ways that we can do that is by using our expertise in organisations such as the Met Office. Kew Gardens in his constituency has some of the world’s greatest scientists. We should work with other countries to make sure that they can adapt and indeed mitigate climate change.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-28-commons.u456	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-28	Davey, Edward Jonathon	Support developing countries' climate adaptation	2019-02-28 00:00:00	2019-02-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-lords	My Lords, it is a matter of great regret that we have reached this point in the Bill and are still debating the definition of deprivation of liberty. We should have been able to resolve this over the last six months, and we should not be having this discussion. We should have agreed it. The reason we have not agreed it, to put one point of criticism, is stated in the letter from the Joint Committee on Human Rights: “It is regrettable that there was no time for adequate consultation on the proposed definition” I think that is exactly right We are where we are, and what we have is a disagreement between our very eminent lawyers—the noble and learned Lords, Lord Hope and Lord Mackay—and those of us who have been looking at and considering the Bill since July last year.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-lords.u99	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-26	Thornton, Dorothea Glenys	Deprivation of liberty definition debate	2019-02-26 00:00:00	2019-02-26 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons	Our guidance makes reference to employers having to consider those who are particularly vulnerable and in those sorts of categories—expectant mothers and so on—and we want them to make sure those people are being taken care of and catered for. None of the equalities legislation has changed; at the end of the day, this is guidance, but overlaid by the current regulatory regime in place across the country.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons.u266	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Sharma, Alok Kumar	Protect vulnerable employees	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords	My Lords, the Government continue the exploration of limited reform and non-legislative options that they began in detail last spring. We are doing so with the greatest care. Any proposals affecting how religious groups are permitted to conduct marriages must be thoroughly assessed for their fairness to all religious groups, and for how far they could achieve the change of practice intended.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords.u3	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-30	Keen, Richard	Government considering marriage reform options	2020-06-30 00:00:00	2020-06-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-commons	I absolutely disagree with the hon. Gentleman. Finance is critical, but this is about more than just finance. The UK will be hosting COP26 this year in partnership with Italy and, as I am sure he is aware, this will be happening in Glasgow. Tackling climate change is about so much more than just finance; it cuts right across the work that we do in the Department for International Development.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-commons.u18	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-04	Morton, Wendy	Climate change beyond finance	2020-03-04 00:00:00	2020-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-lords	There are a number of contenders for the leadership of our great party at the moment. If my noble friend feels this is a cause which will gain currency in my party, no doubt he will pursue it with one of those candidates. However, I return to what I said a few moments ago. The changes we made were progressive, to ensure there was not an inequity in the tax relief benefit.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-lords.u14	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-10	Young, George	Leadership candidates and tax benefits	2019-06-10 00:00:00	2019-06-10 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Lady for drawing attention to the National Audit Office report of last week. I would encourage everyone who cares, as she does, about making sure that we make the most of the success that life outside the European Union can offer us, to read that report. One of the points it makes is that there are many IT systems for which the Government are responsible. Progress on all those systems has been good. The customs declaration system is essential to making sure that we make a success of life outside the European Union. That is why we have invested, particularly, hundreds of millions of pounds in making sure that businesses that will use CDS when they are transferring goods to Northern Ireland can do so with the support of the Trader Support Service.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons.u21	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-12	Gove, Michael Andrew	National Audit Office report praise	2020-11-12 00:00:00	2020-11-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-lords	My Lords, I shall be very brief. First, I thank the Government most warmly for the amendment they have brought forward. It is an exemplary amendment: it has none of the conditions attached that I thought might have been tempting. It is a simple, elegant and comprehensive statement of what it is we must take care of and it has the right balance of technical and emotive language. So I am very grateful and I can say that Historic England, with which I still have a continuing connection, is extremely pleased and grateful to the Government for this. The noble Lord, Lord Cormack, is absolutely right We heard a very powerful speech at Second Reading from the noble Earl, Lord Devon, which warned us, essentially, not to be completely obsessed by the simple presentation of a Victorian building. He was absolutely right, but very much of the medieval Palace—in fact most of it—has disappeared and the cloisters are the most significant part of the archaeology and architecture left, so we should have a special care for them. I am not entirely certain whether they are designated as being at risk. I am very glad that the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, is meeting the chair of Historic England, because we can get very good guidance as to what to do. In my experience, you can always do urgent conservation and repairs, so I see no reason why that should not happen before R&R starts properly, let alone before it finishes, because, frankly, there will be nothing left if it is the stone itself that is so fragile. I would be very interested to know what comes of that meeting, and so, I suspect, will many Members of the House: maybe we can follow that up informally, or maybe through the estates department of the House, to make sure that we know that action is being taken.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-lords.u233	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-22	Andrews, Elizabeth	Gratitude for Government amendment	2019-07-22 00:00:00	2019-07-22 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons	I also echo your comments, Mr Speaker, and my thoughts are with everyone in Glasgow impacted by the incident Wolverhampton City of Sanctuary have been doing great with asylum seekers throughout the covid-19 pandemic and have been brilliant at making sure everyone is connected with each other during this difficult time. At the end of the pandemic, will my hon. Friend come and meet them to see the great work they are doing in Wolverhampton?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons.u161	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-29	Anderson, Stuart Paul	Praise for Wolverhampton's asylum support	2020-06-29 00:00:00	2020-06-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons	When it comes to problems with the Department for Work and Pensions and its policies, it is actually quite difficult to know where to start. The people who depend on this Government Department often depend on it absolutely, and it absolutely is not working. It is not working for those on universal credit, assessments for personal independence payments are not fit for purpose, and the benefits freeze has been described by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation as the “biggest policy driver” of poverty in this country Perhaps universal credit might work if the Government had not taken £3 billion out of the budget back in 2015—it might then fulfil its original and admirable brief of simplifying the system and helping people get back into work—but they did, and now it is not doing so. They did put half of the money back, but it still is not enough. I do, however, applaud the Secretary of State for her acknowledgment that the problems with universal credit have contributed to the frightening and unacceptable growth in the use of food banks by families in this country. We are also seeing late payments, increased stress for people who are often already suffering from stress or mental health issues, and a growth in homelessness Let us put this into context. The DWP will spend £184 billion on benefits and pensions this year. That is a quarter of all public spending. More than half of that, £105 billion, is on pensions, mainly the state pension. Only £22 billion is spent on working-age benefits, and a further £21 billion on housing benefit. As MPs, we have a duty to be careful with our language and to help change the story people in this country hear about the relationship between benefits and poverty The DWP should exist to help families break free from poverty, to support people into work who are able to work and to provide security in old age, but that is not what the story of current policies reflects or tells people who are listening out there. Policies such as the five-week waiting time for universal credit reinforce the feeling among claimants that the Department does not actually want to help them, at least not right away. What they see is a delaying tactic—putting off payments for as long as it possibly can. Meanwhile the Government have spent £370 million last year, and advance payments just paper over the cracks.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons.u436	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-26	Jardine, Christine Anne	DWP policies failing impoverished citizens	2019-02-26 00:00:00	2019-02-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to update the House on progress on our plans for controlling coronavirus Thanks to the immense national effort on social distancing, as a country we have made real progress in reducing the number of new infections. As we move out of lockdown, we look at all indicators to assess progress in tackling the virus. Last week’s Office for National Statistics infection survey estimated that the number of people who have had coronavirus in England fell from 139,000 between 3 and 16 May to 53,000 between 17 and 30 May—a drop of over half. In terms of new cases, an ONS estimate released on Friday shows that there are now around 5,600 new cases each day within the community in England: a huge drop since the peak The number of new fatalities each day is, thankfully, falling too. Today’s figures record 55 fatalities, the lowest number since 21 March, before lockdown began. They also show that there were no deaths recorded in London hospitals. That is a real milestone for the capital, which, of course, in the early stages of the pandemic, faced the biggest peak. Yesterday, we saw no recorded deaths in Scotland, which is very positive news for us all. Sadly, we expect more fatalities in the future, not least because the figures recorded at the weekend are typically lower. What is more, Mr Speaker, 55 deaths is still 55 too many and hundreds of people are still fighting for their lives. Each death brings just as much sadness as when the figure was much higher in the peak. I know that the thoughts of the whole House are with those families and communities who are grieving for their loved ones We, of course, also look at the R rate. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies confirmed on Friday that its estimates, taking into account 10 different models, are that R remains between 0.7 to 0.9, and that it is below 1 in every region of the country. That means the number of new infections is expected to continue to fall. So there are encouraging trends on all critical measures. Coronavirus is in retreat across the land. Our plan is working and those downward trends mean that we can proceed with our plans, but we do so putting caution and safety first Even at the peak of the pandemic, we protected the NHS and ensured that it was not overwhelmed. We will not allow a second peak that overwhelms the NHS. We are bearing down on the virus in our communities, aided by our new NHS test and trace system, which is growing every day. We are bearing down on the virus in our communities, aided by our new NHS test and trace system, which is growing every day. We are bearing down on infections in our hospitals, including through the new measures to tackle nosocomial infection, such as face masks for visitors, patients and staff. Finally, we are strengthening protections for our care homes, including by getting tests to all elderly care home residents and staff. I am glad to be able to tell the House that David Pearson, the eminent social care expert who has previously led the social care body ADASS—the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services—and has decades of experience of leadership in both social care and public health, will be chairing our new social care taskforce to drive our covid action plan yet further. David has an impressive track record and I am delighted that he will be supporting us in leading this important work. Together, we are getting this virus under control and now more than ever we must not lose our resolve.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-commons.u111	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-08	Hancock, Matthew John David	Progress on controlling coronavirus	2020-06-08 00:00:00	2020-06-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons	My hon. Friend raises a very important issue. Our thoughts are with the family and friends of her constituents. It was a very important summit that we held on Monday. I was pleased to bring together people from the police, across Government Departments, community groups, the judiciary, healthcare and a wide range of activities to recognise the importance of taking a holistic, collective approach to dealing with knife crime. We will be consulting on a statutory duty to deal with knife crime as a public health issue, which is important, to ensure that everybody plays their part After the summit I was able to meet a number of families who had lost children—I say children, because these were teenagers—as a result of serious violence involving knife crime and a shooting. The horror and devastation of these attacks is brought home when sitting down and listening to the families who have seen promising young lives cut short in this tragic way. We are committed as a Government to working not just across Government but with society as a whole to deal with the scourge of serious violence, which is taking so many young lives.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons.u131	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-03	May, Theresa Mary	Knife crime public health approach	2019-04-03 00:00:00	2019-04-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-lords	My Lords, as I said yesterday, the Government believe that it is important for citizens in all parts of the United Kingdom to feel connected to the legislature and politicians and for there to be trust in our democratic institutions. That is one reason why we have committed to establish the commission that I referred to. However, the issue of regional representation is almost certainly germane to any consideration of the role of this House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-lords.u61	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Curzon, Frederick Richard Penn	Regional representation and trust	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for raising this question, and I am mindful of the Select Committee report that addressed some of it. We have now made changes so that women going into work for the first time from benefits—either universal credit or a legacy benefit—will be able to access advance payments for that first month so that they do not have to find the money themselves. I am making sure that work coaches have more independence to support people back into work; that is one of the changes I have made.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons.u169	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-01	Rudd, Amber	Support for women returning work	2019-07-01 00:00:00	2019-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-commons	I commend my right hon. and learned Friend and his Department for the minimal impact that the covid pandemic has had on our courts system. Can I ask when it will return to normal? Can I also ask that he review contingencies should they be needed in the very near future?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-commons.u94	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-08	Moore, Damien	Commend COVID response, seek normalcy	2020-12-08 00:00:00	2020-12-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-lords	My Lords, it usually falls to me to embarrass Ministers, not the other way round. I felt myself blush just then, and I hope it was not caught too closely on television—but I thank the Minister very much indeed for her comments Leading on a Bill in your Lordships’ House, whether in a government position or in opposition, is an honour and a privilege—but those who have done it before will know what I mean when I say that it can take over your life. It is not just the bad dreams and the nightmares of waking up and thinking, “Did I actually say that? ” or “Did I forget that amendment? ” ; it is all the other work that goes with it: meetings with third parties who feel that they should participate in the Bill, and in our case—this may not be true of the Government—talking to our colleagues in the Commons, and to other groups in this House that have to be involved. It is well known that it is simply not possible to improve a Bill unless those of all parties, and none, join together to see what the public interest requires There are also meetings with the clerks, and Back-Bench liaison on our side, and voting strategy meetings. There is a lot going on, and that does not get any less as we come towards the end of the process. It gets to the point where you eat, sleep and dream the Bill. That is fine when it takes six weeks, but it is not fine if it takes six months, as this Bill has done, to get through to its final process There are pluses too. Working on a Bill means working intensively with colleagues. I do not just mean my noble friends Lord Grantchester and Lord McNicol, and our extraordinarily hard-working legislative assistant Ben Wood; it also means working with the Bill team. I agree that all credit is due to Suzanne Greaves and her team, because they have been fantastic to us as well as to Ministers, giving us information and responding, to a very high standard, to often ridiculous requests at very short notice. Ministers, including the noble Lord, Lord Bates, and the noble Viscount, Lord Younger, have been excellent at the Dispatch Box, both in what they have said but also in saying it very quickly. That is, I believe, often the hallmark of a good Minister I am sure I speak for the whole House when I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Fairhead, on what is, extraordinarily, her first Bill. She has it brought it to the House with consummate skill and considerable confidence. She ensured that we met regularly outside the Chamber for the meetings we have referred to, which were robust but extremely good and fruitful. We made progress and we were given all the information we needed We did not always agree—the Minister has acknowledged that—but where we differed, we did so only after all avenues for compromise had been explored and we proceeded on the basis of mutual respect for each other’s point of view. In doing that, we upheld the best standards of this House.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-lords.u124	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-20	Stevenson, Robert	Reflecting on leading a Bill	2019-03-20 00:00:00	2019-03-20 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons	I do not wish to take up much of the House’s time, but has the hon. Lady had a chance to meet my constituent, Deborah Brownson, who has created extraordinary facilities through the online autism plan to help parents and children who are facing difficulties? If she has not met her, she should and join the campaign to get Government support for what Deborah is doing.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons.u406	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-21	Woodcock, John	Support for online autism plan	2019-03-21 00:00:00	2019-03-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-18-lords	My Lords, it is a great honour to be piloting this important Private Member’s Bill through your Lordships’ House. Its promoter in the House of Commons was the right honourable Sir Greg Knight, MP for East Yorkshire, who is himself an unusually committed and elegant motorist. He has been most dedicated and committed in his work, which will have such a positive impact on so many of his constituents and on everyone who drives a vehicle and needs to park it from time to time I cannot remember having been directly involved with a piece of legislation that has provoked so favourable a reaction in everyone I meet since 11 February 1977, when I moved the Second Reading of the Passenger Vehicles (Educational and Other Purposes) Bill, which eventually became the Minibus Act 1977. So I have some experience of how difficult it is to manage the procedures of the House, and I salute Sir Greg for his diligence and for successfully captaining this small but beautifully made Bill through the other place. I also thank the excellent government Bill team for its ready and first-class assistance and support I am so pleased to see so many important Members of the House participating in this debate. I recall that it is almost exactly 30 years ago that my noble friend Lord Kirkhope successfully introduced a Private Member’s Bill that became the Parking Act 1989. In the House of Commons, that Bill required no debate at all on Second Reading, while Committee lasted just 75 minutes. I cannot promise such brevity today, but I am greatly heartened by the many expressions of support that I have received from all parts of the House With its focus on emerging technologies, the 1989 Act was certainly ahead of its time, but new legislation is now urgently needed. The Bill addresses the need for fairness and consistency for motorists who park on private land, and seeks to codify for the first time the standards that should be expected of all private parking providers. Currently, the private parking industry operates under a system of self-regulation. The system is good in parts, but it cannot provide the clarity that motorists rightly crave The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 banned the controversial practice of wheel clamping and, in Schedule 4, made the keeper or hirer of a vehicle liable for any unpaid parking charges associated with that vehicle. Since then, any private parking company seeking to enforce a parking ticket against a motorist has needed details of the home address of the registered keeper, which it can obtain only from the DVLA. The DVLA will disclose that data only if a parking company is a member of one of the two parking trade associations, the British Parking Association or the International Parking Community To be a member of a parking trade association, a company must abide by a code of practice that sets out operational requirements by which a parking operator must abide. Each association has its own code of practice and different standards to which it holds its members. This has led to a degree of consumer confusion, with different rules applying on different sites and the inherent risk of a race to the bottom in code standards. A single code of practice would give us an opportunity to create a consistent standard across the industry, and to make best practice the standard practice for parking operators. I am pleased to say that these measures will apply in Scotland, England and Wales, giving motorists confidence that the same rules will apply whenever and wherever they park in a private car park on the UK mainland I shall go through the clauses. Clause 1 sets out the basis of the proposed code and Clause 2 the procedure for establishing it, including comprehensive consultation of interested parties and a significant role for Parliament in acceding to the draft code. Clause 3 requires the Secretary of State to keep the code under review, and Clause 4 sets out the basis for the publication of the code Clause 5 covers the intended status of the code, establishing that it will be admissible in legal proceedings and that adherence to it will be a requirement for a parking provider seeking access to the DVLA register. Clause 6 deals with the delegation of functions so far as policing the code is concerned. I will return to Clause 7 in a moment. Clause 8 establishes a levy on the accredited parking providers in order to fund the new system. Clauses 9 and 10 relate to regulations and interpretation, and Clauses 11 and 12 deal with the application to the Crown of the legislation and commencement This Bill comes to us with comprehensive support from all quarters, including the trade bodies for the private parking industry and motorists’ groups. Andrew Pester, chief executive of the British Parking Association—one of the two existing membership organisations with a self-regulatory code and access to the DVLA database—has supported, “a single standard body, single code of practice and a single independent appeals service” In his words, the Bill, “provides a unique opportunity to deliver greater consistency and consumer confidence” No one is arguing that there is no problem. Highly undesirable practices in the private parking industry range from threatening letters sent to motorists, poor signage in car parks and aggressive debt collection practices. One particular bugbear has been the failure to provide a transparent, fair appeal system when a motorist feels that a ticket has been issued unfairly. Motorists who wish to challenge a parking ticket are often uncertain about how to proceed; where to lodge an appeal is unclear and changes from site to site and company to company. The existing appeals processes lack transparency, and the cost of paying a ticket can rise if an appeal is made, as early payment options just melt away. Consumers feel pressurised into paying unfair parking tickets, because they fear the increased costs, should an appeal be unsuccessful Thanks to an amendment in the House of Commons, the provisions in this Bill now cover the appointment of a single appeals service, in Clause 7, which sets out the process by which the Secretary of State will be able to establish a single, independent appeals process. This will improve transparency and give motorists confidence that if they appeal against a parking ticket they will know where to go, in the confident and well-placed expectation that their appeal will receive a fair hearing. Steve Gooding, the director of the RAC Foundation, has said: “We particularly welcome the proposal for a single, independent appeals service, which, together with a single, clear code of practice should establish a better, clearer framework and a level playing field that is fairer for all” The RAC Foundation is already making an invaluable contribution to producing the first draft of the code, for which it deserves our thanks Parking operators that operate in a fair and transparent manner, of which there are many, will not suffer from a code of practice coming into force, but it will stop those who undermine the whole sector with poor practices. Providers who already work to the standards of best practice will find that little or nothing changes for them. In time, the best practice that exists in many areas of the industry should become the standard. I believe that is why industry bodies have welcomed this Bill, supporting the Government in considering the areas a code of practice should cover This Private Member’s Bill, a great example of non-partisan co-operation, offers an excellent opportunity to significantly improve the conduct of the private parking sector, creating a fair, transparent, consistent system that motorists can confidently use whenever they need to. I close by again underlining the deep appreciation of all of us for the dedication and commitment of this Bill’s parent, Sir Greg Knight.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-18-lords.u30	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-18	Hunt, David James Fletcher	Codifying standards for private parking	2019-01-18 00:00:00	2019-01-18 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons	I am grateful to my right hon. Friend The second big issue that is relevant to this business of the House motion is that, traditionally, only a Minister may move a money resolution in support of legislation that requires the expenditure of public funds. Again, there is very good reason for this, because the Government have to be responsible for the Budget, and they normally understand that, if they want to spend more, they have to raise more through taxes or borrowing. The Government are responsible for both sides of the account. Again, the House can criticise, refuse to agree or try to get the Government to shift their position, but it is the Government who are financially responsible to the markets and for all the other reporting that has to be done. This proposal could have very significant financial consequences indeed, because staying in the European Union is an extremely expensive thing to do, and I think it would need a money resolution, which should be moved by a Minister of the Crown.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons.u416	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-03	Redwood, John Alan	Minister must move money resolution	2019-04-03 00:00:00	2019-04-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-01-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for her remarks on this important issue, and the noble Lords, Lord Hayward, Lord Collins and Lord Cashman, for tabling the amendment. The Minister has given her view and we can have a separate debate on what happens about making law in Northern Ireland in the absence of the Assembly. However, I ask that the amendment not be pressed to a vote. It might cause difficulties with the Bill’s progress and the realisation of its very important aims.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-01-lords.u85	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-01	Hodgson, Fiona	Amendment not voted on	2019-02-01 00:00:00	2019-02-01 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons	Let me reassure the shadow Minister on one or two points. She concluded her questions by asking about the risk of destitution. To be clear, if somebody who is in the inadmissible cohort is unable to make provision for their own accommodation or upkeep, they will be eligible for accommodation in the normal way, just as people currently in the Dublin third country cohort, awaiting return to a European country, are accommodated and supported. There will be no risk of destitution, which would of course infringe their article 3 rights were it ever to happen The hon. Lady asks about the status of people who may fall into that cohort. Clearly, the intention is that a period of time will pass when we seek the agreement of a third country to return them. That will happen within a reasonable time—we will set that out in guidance, but it will be a matter of a few months; it will not be a long time. If, after that reasonable time, no agreement is forthcoming, their asylum claim will be substantively considered here. There will not be any extended period of limbo, which I do not think would be in anybody’s interests The hon. Lady refers to the fact that these arrangements are in some regards similar in concept to Dublin. I hope the House will take from that that they are reasonable in spirit, because no one has objected to the principles that underpin the Dublin regulations—indeed, many people have pointed to them as exemplars Finally, the message all of us in this House should be sending out, the Opposition Front Bench included, is that if somebody is in continental Europe and they feel they have a protection claim that needs to be heard, they should not attempt a dangerous crossing of the English channel. They should not pay money to ruthless people smugglers. They should use the very well-functioning asylum systems in our very civilised European neighbours. Let that message go out from this House today; it will save life.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons.u134	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-16	Philp, Chris Ian Brian Mynott	No destitution limbo for asylum seekers	2020-12-16 00:00:00	2020-12-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	The Prime Minister is not serious; he needs to understand that actions have consequences. Even my five-year-old knows that if you do something wrong, you have to say sorry. If my son can apologise for kicking a football indoors, surely the Prime Minister can have the humility to say sorry—for misleading the Queen, misleading the country and illegally shutting down our democracy.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u678	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Swinson, Joanne Kate	PM must apologize	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons	I am pleased that my right hon. Friend’s police force, in particular, will receive a very large settlement of just under £32 million. We are having an ongoing conversation with the wider policing family about how and where our priority activity should take place. That discussion is being held under the auspices of the new National Policing Board, on which all arms of policing are represented. The board will settle the priority action that will be taken forward We have had discussions, particularly at the board’s last meeting, on prioritising violence. At the top of the list, murder is the tip of the iceberg of violence, which features many types of crime. I hope we will move to a 360° approach to fighting crime over the next few months and years, and I hope that chief constables will support us in doing so.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons.u377	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-24	Malthouse, Christopher Laurie	Police funding and crime priority	2020-02-24 00:00:00	2020-02-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-30-commons	I certainly would not draw a parallel. This was criminal behaviour and there have been significant sentences imposed on those who were perpetrating the fraud. Indeed, there are ongoing criminal investigations whereby we may yet see more convictions. It is important that we take stock of this and that we reflect on the NAO report when it is published and made available to us. As I have said, the Home Secretary will come to the House and make a full statement when we have the NAO findings. He continues, and indeed I continue, to review this situation and work out what is the best way forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-30-commons.u195	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-30	Nokes, Caroline Fiona Ellen	Ongoing criminal investigations fraud convictions	2019-04-30 00:00:00	2019-04-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons	While the recovery package provides unprecedented support for locally known jewels like the Hippodrome theatre in Todmorden, the Hebden Bridge Little Theatre, the Rex cinema in Elland and the Brighouse Civic Hall, we all know that no recovery can be complete until audiences are able to enjoy performances once again. Can my hon. Friend confirm that her Department has in place a strategy, if not a date, for easing lockdown restrictions and the eventual return of theatres to full use?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons.u256	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-07	Whittaker, Craig	Support theatres reopening strategy needed	2020-07-07 00:00:00	2020-07-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords	My Lords, I raise a point on an area I hope the Government are currently improving. In the past I was the managing director of a small plastic manufacturing company. We were very pleased to get business contracts and strove hard to get the contracts from the Government themselves. Will the Minister therefore look at the Government’s record currently? In the past, the pressure was on small firms to get the contracts but not always on ensuring the payments were made on time.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords.u107	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-19	Cotter, Brian Joseph Michael	Prompt Government contract payment improvements	2019-06-19 00:00:00	2019-06-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons	It is always a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Rugby (Mark Pawsey). It is a particular pleasure to follow my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield South East (Mr Betts) and for Liverpool, Riverside (Dame Louise Ellman), both of whom came to the House with long and distinguished careers in local government, and indeed having achieved positions of national prominence. We can learn from their experience. It seems clear from the debate that the Government have a two-pronged approach. The first is cynically to try to divide rural and urban areas. It will not work in my constituency because there are both urban and rural areas in it. The second is the cynical modus operandi that I have mentioned previously of slashing support to public services, then blaming local authorities for failing to deliver them, or when they are forced to put up the council tax For example, it is slightly off topic, but we are campaigning to bring a second fire engine back to Chester, yet the fire authority’s funding will fall to zero next year. Local Conservatives have the nerve to support that campaign, even though their party introduced the cuts In the previous debate, hon. Members talked about the increase in knife crime. The Mayor of London is often blamed for a rise in knife crime in London, despite the fact that across the country 20,000 police have been cut. The problem intermeshes with the cuts to local government that we are discussing. Children’s services and money to schools have been slashed. It is no wonder that knife crime has increased, but apparently it is all the fault of the Mayor of London and others That brings me to the settlement for my council, Cheshire West and Chester. For the last four years, the Labour council, led by Samantha Dixon, has had to deal with a £57 million cut. Since 2010, the cash cut to my local authority has been £330 million. In the next round, which we are discussing, a further £20 million will be cut, despite the fact that that extremely efficient council, which is down to its bare bones, is already running on empty. If the Secretary of State had any courage or sense of responsibility, he would tell us where he thinks those cuts should fall. Should they be to support for vulnerable children, disabled adults, the homeless—homelessness has of course doubled nationally on the Conservatives’ watch—or rural bus services? Ministers will then of course attack our council leaders when we are forced to put up council tax My hon. Friend the Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) pointed out that all the additional spending power is created only from increases in council tax, but the situation is worse than that. The rate support grant is largely being replaced by individual pots for which councils have to bid in a beauty contest: money for potholes; money for rapid rehousing; support for high streets; extra cash for children’s services. Councils have to go cap in hand to Ministers every time they want to fund anything, and Ministers can cherry-pick their favourite councils. We all know where that money will go The Government are centralising expenditure and taking away local democracy. They have announced extra money for 20 councils to support children’s social services. I can make a fair guess that the majority of those councils will be of a particular political complexion, and they will not be Labour. There will be another special deal for Surrey or, as we have heard tonight, for Tory Northamptonshire Meanwhile, locally, the Minister’s fellow Conservatives in Cheshire West and Chester want to spend more money supporting free parking and on mowing the grass while criticising Labour locally for having to put up the council tax. Those are both worthy aims, but those Conservatives need to do locally what the Conservatives have so far failed to do nationally—namely, to say which services will be cut to pay for the increased expenditure. If I may, I will briefly cross over the border into Cheshire East, because this has implications for the Minister. Madness still reigns there, with police investigations, corruption allegations and a whole series of chief executives and senior officers being sacked. I say to the Minister that if that were a Labour council, the commissioners would have been called in years ago Ministers are driving ahead with plans to keep 100% of business rates, which means that the richer councils will get richer and the poorer areas will be made even poorer. The Conservatives will use that business rate revenue to keep their council tax rises low, then claim political credit because the funding formula has been cut back. Cuts are forcing local authorities and other public services to hunker down and defend the money that they have. In Cheshire West and Chester, we are trying to build local partnerships with voluntary groups and charities, but that is not sustainable for long. At some point, Ministers will have to take responsibility for the dreadful effects that their cuts are having in the real world.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons.u479	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-05	Matheson, Christian John Patrick	Government cuts harm local services	2019-02-05 00:00:00	2019-02-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-05-lords	My Lords, this has been, to put it mildly, a fascinating debate. I listened very carefully to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay, making the case for removing fault from the divorce procedure. I listened equally attentively to the noble Lord, Lord Farmer, arguing that fault should be maintained. On the one hand, I completely understand how removing fault will make divorces less acrimonious, which may be a good thing. On the other hand, I completely understand that if marriage is a lifelong commitment, with all its extensive public policy benefits, there must be constraints on the freedom to exit. It does not make sense that one should be able to walk out of a serious “till death us do part” commitment unless there has been a serious event, such as adultery, to justify doing so I very much believe that marriage is a mutual institution, and so I agree that if one party wants to leave, they cannot be compelled to remain. My concern is that if we change the law simply to give one party the power to end the marriage just because he or she wants to, it will have the effect of making divorce very much more accessible. The truth is that, while it would plainly be unwise and quite wrong for the state to try to hold people in marriages against their will, marriages have been saved and made strong again because divorce was not immediately accessible, and in that context it made complete sense for the couple to exhaust all other options before turning to the very difficult process of divorce My concern is that this Bill, in making divorce more accessible, is likely to elicit a greater readiness to turn to divorce and will thereby foster a lower dissatisfaction threshold within marriage when previously couples would have exhibited a greater willingness to stay and fight for their marriage I have no doubt at all that, from the narrow administrative perspective of the court, removing fault makes sense. My point, however, is that while we are considering a legal process in which the interests of the courts are very important, this process has potentially huge consequences for society at large. Studies certainly suggest that the provision of easier divorce is likely to give rise to a long-term increase in the divorce rate by up to 10% to 20%. Douglas Allen’s survey of no-fault divorce between 1995 and 2006 suggests an increase of up to 10%, while a study by González and Viitanen suggests an increase of up to 20%. This would constitute a social development that we could well do without In addition to this concern, I feel very uncomfortable about the impact of the Bill on the standing of the relevant parties. It seems—albeit unintentionally, I am sure—to create a vulnerable party, which I do not think will resonate with Workington’s sense of fair play. On the one hand, we have the person who wants to leave the marriage—the petitioner. Rather than the petitioner being constrained by the serious nature of the commitment he made on entering the marriage, the Bill enables him to call it a day simply because he is bored. The legislation will greatly enhance his autonomy, enabling him to do what he wants to do regardless of any commitment he may have made on his wedding day. For the petitioner, the Bill as currently framed will extend his personal freedom On the other hand, we have the person in the marriage who is not initiating divorce proceedings—the respondent. For them, the divorce could well come as a complete bolt from the blue, because there is now no need for it to be preceded by the conflict inherent in adultery and unreasonable behaviour. Their position is also weakened because the Bill proposes removing their right to contest the divorce—something that 83% of responses to the Government’s consultation preceding the Bill opposed If the petitioner wants to leave, he can leave, and within just 26 weeks. The salutary thing about this is the insecurity it would bring to marriages; on the passing of this Bill, anyone who is married would become a potential respondent and could be divorced in just 26 weeks simply because their spouse has changed their mind and no longer wants to be married. As if this were not enough, the Bill will also make the respondent vulnerable to being divorced in what is from their perspective a seven-week process, as Professor Hodson has pointed out. There is no mechanism to compel the petitioner to serve notice on the respondent until he wants the first decree of divorce at the end of the 20-week reflection period. Far from removing conflict, it seems to me that the Bill as currently drafted is likely to greatly exacerbate it I am also very concerned about the way in which the interests of the petitioner have been prioritised over those of the children. There has been an attempt to argue that this Bill will help children by liberating them more quickly from unhappy marriages, and without as much conflict as they would witness if fault remained. On both grounds I find this problematic. First, there is an extensive body of literature that shows that divorce does not free children from conflict; it makes conflict a permanent feature of their lives as they are split over two households. Secondly, rather than helping children, conflict-free divorces can be the most difficult to process because they come as a bolt from the blue for no apparent reason. As the social scientist Elizabeth Marquardt has observed: “The children of low-conflict couples fare worse after divorce because the divorce marks their first exposure to a serious problem. One day, without much warning, their world just falls apart. ” Another thing that I find concerning is the way the Bill designs the divorce process to expedite divorce rather than save marriages. The initial consultation document on divorce reform said: “The need to make allegations can lay the ground for confrontation with the other spouse right from the start of proceedings. It becomes ingrained as the practical need arises to evidence details of the other spouse’s conduct. ” Mindful of this, it seems unfortunate to me that the statement of irretrievable breakdown is made at the start of the 20-week reflection period, given that between 2003 and 2016 on average more than 12,000 more divorce processes were commenced each year than ever concluded. It is very clear that we should seek to promote reconciliation during the divorce process as well as before it. With this in mind, it would make far more sense to commence the divorce process with a 20-week reflection period that culminated in a declaration of irretrievable breakdown if reconciliation could not be secured, rather than beginning with this very stark statement. There is a similar point to be made about a statement of irretrievable breakdown at the start of the proceedings rather than after the 20-week period The problems raised in the Bill as currently drafted are of such a serious nature and so far-reaching that there is a good case for remitting it to a Select Committee for an inquiry.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-05-lords.u88	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-05	Morrow, Maurice	Concerns about no-fault divorce	2020-02-05 00:00:00	2020-02-05 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords	I too thank the noble Lord, Lord German, for providing this opportunity to debate these measures and I note his very important point about procedure, particularly when dealing with such a controversial subject. I also join with other noble Lords in congratulating the two new Peers who made their maiden speeches today My starting point, like that of others, is that it is vital to get more housing and that we use brownfield sites. But—and there are many buts, relating to quality, the impact on health, and the impact of blighting some areas. I want to make five points and to suggest a way forward First, the current permitted development regime has had many damaging impacts in parts of the country—not everywhere, but in many places. I think of areas like Hounslow and Harlow where very poor housing has resulted from permitted development, with houses in factories, in industrial units, and houses that are simply not suitable for their purpose. That is not just about individual suffering because it can also blight an area and an economy. On Monday, a Bradford architect pointed out to me the effect of cheap and shoddy development on an area, particularly somewhere like Bradford, which is desperately seeking to revitalise the centre of town. Building slums in the centre of Bradford is not going to help. Building slums in poor areas magnifies existing problems. I believe that these regulations do nothing to improve the situation; looking at them in detail shows that they add complexity to an already complex situation Looking ahead, we all understand, I am sure, the link between housing and health, and how poor housing can damage mental and physical health in all kinds of ways, from cold and damp to air and noise pollution, overcrowding, fire safety and much more. The evidence is compelling and Covid has reinforced this point for all of us. What if we thought about this differently and thought about developing housing that was deliberately built to enhance health and well-being, and promote human flourishing? Should that not be our aim, rather than just producing cheap and rather shoddy developments? On a positive note, I am delighted that the Government have accepted the principle that there must be standards of access to daylight, and space standards. I stress “standards”; not things to be considered during development, but clear, compulsory standards. This is a very important precedent to have set. I suggest that we need standards in other areas, too, from noise insulation to air pollution and access to green spaces and amenities. There is a way forward. The Town and Country Planning Association has produced a draft Bill on healthy housing, which does precisely what I suggest. It places the focus on developing housing for health and well-being, liveability and resilience in the face of future pandemics, and sets out 10 areas for principles and standards that all developments must follow. I hope that it will be introduced in Parliament in due course, but I would welcome the opportunity to discuss it with the Minister in the meantime This proposed Bill has an additional advantage. Current planning and building regulations are horribly complex, contradictory and confusing. The Bill offers a new focus on a single set of essential principles and standards that has the potential to clarify the situation and unify the way forward. So I hope that the Minister will consider this point. Does he agree that it is important that the Government build on the precedent that they have already set on access to daylight and space standards—the precedent of introducing “standards”, not “things to consider”—in additional areas that will ensure that all developments are of high quality and suitable design? Can he give the House a date when the space standards referred to in the other place will be brought into effect?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords.u158	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-27	Crisp, Edmund	Housing quality and development standards	2020-10-27 00:00:00	2020-10-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords	My Lords, 1,075 is not the definitive number: it is 1,075 who have been settled through the Vulnerable Children’s Resettlement Scheme. In addition, there is the vulnerable persons settlement scheme, under which we have resettled almost 14,000 people, half of whom were children. I am confident that quality assurance is in place, and I expect it to be in place given that we are dealing with probably the most vulnerable children who settle in this country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords.u40	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Williams, Susan	Vulnerable children resettlement statistics	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	As the hon. Lady will know, we sought to have a regionally based approach, and that was working. Ultimately, though, we could not sustain it, so we had to have this period of lockdown. I am hopeful and confident that once that period of lockdown ends, those productions will be able to continue. I note that we have ensured that rehearsals for them can continue behind closed doors during this lockdown period, which was not the case previously.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u73	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Dowden, Oliver James	Lockdown disrupts regional approach	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords	My Lords, the Government have been pretty supportive of retail and other business tenants, with the rates holiday, VAT help, the furlough scheme and the moratorium against enforcement by landlords. I have little doubt that these will be extended for as long as coronavirus issues continue, but have the Government seriously considered how they will be unwound for tenants, in particular the moratorium on rents? As soon as it is lifted, some landlords will seek enormous backdated rents, all owed at once, which themselves would bankrupt businesses that have been unable to trade for a significant period. Either government support or some unwinding of the moratorium is needed to avoid these bankruptcies.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords.u134	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-27	Taylor, Matthew Owen John	Government must manage rent moratorium	2020-10-27 00:00:00	2020-10-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons	I thank the Minister for his initial response. A regulator is nothing without the ability genuinely to disrupt the business practices of a firm that it is regulating. What assurances can he give the House that the proposed Ofcom plus regulator can genuinely bring social media companies to account with simply a bit of public shaming and fines? Does he agree that there needs to be a tech levy set at 2% of UK revenues in order properly to fund this super-regulator Will the Minister confirm that there will be a legal duty on companies to inform users of their personal privacy rights? Would not the new regulatory framework benefit from pre-legislative scrutiny by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, as well as from allowing the Committee a veto over the appointment or dismissal of the head of the regulator, in exactly the same way that the Treasury Committee has over the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility? Will the Minister assure the House that legislation will be forthcoming this calendar year, as we have been waiting a very long time for this?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons.u157	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-13	Knight, Julian Carlton	Call for stronger social media regulation	2020-02-13 00:00:00	2020-02-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-01-lords	I was expecting the noble Baroness, Lady Thornton, to talk for a little longer, so I thank her very much I thank my noble friend Lord McColl for initiating this discussion on the role of the deceased’s loved ones under the proposed new system. This is an important issue that has rightly been the focus of much of the debate in the other place and here. My noble friends Lord McColl and Lord O’Shaughnessy rightly stress the issue of trust. As both my honourable friend the Member for Thurrock and the noble Lord, Lord O’Shaughnessy, have confirmed on a number of occasions, the family will remain at the heart of the new arrangements, as now. I believe this reassurance has also been given in correspondence to my noble friend and has been confirmed by NHS Blood and Transplant’s medical director and national clinical lead for organ donation. I am happy to give further clarification on this point The legislation sets the framework for consent to organ donation and reflects what we already know—that most people support donation and agree that the decision of the potential donor should be paramount. We have, however, always said that, as now, organs and tissues will not be taken without full consultation with persons in a qualifying relationship—that is, the deceased’s close family and friends. There will always be a personal discussion between the specialist nurses for organ donation and the family. This is NHS Blood and Transplant’s current policy and will not change under the new system In addition to this policy, the Bill as drafted allows for a person in a qualifying relationship to the deceased to provide information about the deceased’s wishes on donation of their organs and tissues. This is an important safeguard, to find out what the deceased would have wanted and the best way forward. I remind the House that healthcare professionals have a duty of care not only to the patient but to the family. Specialist nurses for organ donations are highly trained professionals from an intensive care or emergency medicine nursing background. When nurses join NHS Blood and Transplant, they initially receive extensive training over a six-month period. This covers supporting families to make end-of-life care decisions, including on organ donation. A key focus of the training is to enhance their skills in supporting acutely bereaved and grieving families.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-01-lords.u13	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-01	Manzoor, Zahida	Organ donation family involvement emphasized	2019-02-01 00:00:00	2019-02-01 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons	The hon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tracey Crouch) is an ambassador and a pioneer in this House for football. She has not been able to attend the House because of illness, but we should put on record our thanks to her for what she did to promote the sport of football. She came to my constituency and visited the Comber Rec women’s football team, and really encouraged those people to take sport forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons.u500	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-16	Shannon, Richard James	Thanks to Tracey Crouch	2020-09-16 00:00:00	2020-09-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords	My Lords, this worthy debate has been far too short. The noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, deserves our congratulations on all that she has done, together with her team, which was mentioned a moment ago. She is right to encourage the putting of poverty at the heart of government policy, although we recognise that this will entail a major change of approach. The SMC report which she has presented reminds us that there are no official measures of poverty in England or across the UK as a whole. As others have said, can the Minister say why this is? How is it possible to target poverty, particularly child poverty? We have heard from a number of Peers that what gets measured gets done—the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, and the right reverend Prelate made that same point Noble Lords may recall the debates we had at the time over the use of income measures in the Child Poverty Act, which was renamed by the coalition Government as the life chances Act. My noble friend Lady Lister will certainly recall that, as indeed will the noble Lord, Lord Freud, who led the charge in those days. The income measures were replaced by reporting obligations on workless households and educational attainment, particularly at key stage 4. Can the Minister please remind us of progress on those reports, which are required to be made to Parliament? I think that two are due by now under those arrangements It would seem that the Social Metrics Commission accepts that an income component to measuring poverty is appropriate. This would base its data on the FRS. As we have heard from a number of noble Lords, its metric of total resources available is proposed to include all sources of post-tax earnings and income, including benefit and tax credit income, liquid assets available for immediate use—I can see that there may be some difficulties with those at the margins—deductions for family-specific recurring costs such as housing and childcare, along with the inescapable costs of disability. I think that the report floats the possibility of social care being included at some stage. We are thoroughly supportive of the proposals to include rough sleepers as living in poverty. Indeed, it should be impossible to describe them otherwise We know that despite the substantial effort on the part of the commission there are still gaps where the policy is not oven-ready. The approach of the commission is caveated by reference to, “within existing data and research”. The report indicates that the commission decided that it was not possible to move immediately to a new method of equivalisation and that more work would be needed. Can the Minister say how any future work on this is to be undertaken? I think that we were given a hint that there may be a Bill in the offing at some stage. Will this be the responsibility of the DWP or the Social Metrics Commission? Who has responsibility for and ownership of the project? At the end of the day, this should be about sending a message to Government about changing the dire state of our communities blighted by poverty. We have some 14.3 million people living in poverty, including 8.2 million working-age adults despite the success of universal support, as well as 4.6 million in persistent poverty. I could go on. We must build a picture of those in poverty so that we can better understand their challenges and what they need to make progress in their lives.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords.u226	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-21	McKenzie, William David	Addressing poverty measurement in policy	2019-01-21 00:00:00	2019-01-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-lords	My Lords, we are not being told the full story. The bottom line is quite simple: what was the real reason Kate Bingham was picked to do this job when she clearly had a conflict of interests, as has already been stated by my noble friend Lady Armstrong? Why did she give the contract to Admiral Associates? There is something we are not being told. Are there undisclosed relationships at play here, which are subsequently going to be revealed when the Minister makes the Statement he has twice promised us during this Question Time?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-lords.u99	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Campbell-Savours, Dale Norman	Conflict of interest疑Kate Bingham	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons	Of course, the hon. Gentleman’s position is not a deal Brexit or a no-deal Brexit; it is no Brexit. That is what he is seeking to bring about. There is no evidence that the SNP has at any time been serious about getting a deal for Scotland. On each occasion it has had the opportunity to vote for a deal, it has voted against it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons.u64	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-24	Mundell, David Gordon	SNP wants no Brexit	2019-07-24 00:00:00	2019-07-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons	I think my right hon. Friend has far more trust in the words of the Government and the guidance than I do What would stop an agency deciding that an unofficial dispute constituted disorder or harm to the economy that it was worth taking action against? The Bill is written so badly and broadly that it is effectively a licence to criminally disrupt working people taking action to support themselves, their co-workers and their families, and we have seen this all too often in the past. The Bill paves the way for gross abuses of state power against citizens In Liverpool, we have a healthy suspicion of state power, because we have felt its damaging force too often in the past. We have experienced the 30-year fight of the Hillsborough families and survivors for truth and justice. We have had striking workers targeted by state violence, and trade unionists blacklisted and spied on for representing their members, and we are not alone. Campaigners fighting miscarriages of justice across our country, such as Orgreave, the Shrewsbury 24 and now Grenfell Tower, oppose this dangerous Bill I fear that my own party is being taken for a ride by this Government, because I will tell you what happens. You start with the idea that legislating for something that operates in the shadows must be a good thing. You then engage in good faith with a morally bankrupt Government arguing for vital safeguards, and once that Government finish stringing you along, you end up in the perverse situation of condoning laws that ride a coach and horses through our nation’s civil liberties and could even be used against the labour movement itself I am sent here by my constituents to stand up for their rights, freedoms and well-being, and that is what forces me to vote against the Bill tonight.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons.u386	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-15	Carden, Daniel Joseph	Opposition to repressive government bill	2020-10-15 00:00:00	2020-10-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-lords	My Lords, I declare my farming interests as set out in the register. Upland and tenant farmers are key to a vibrant agricultural sector and rural communities. In the tenant farming sector, we have consulted on proposals to support productivity improvements and facilitate structural change. We will publish a response to the consultation soon. Food production and environmental enhancement are central to our plans and go hand in hand. We are working with farmers in all sectors and locations to co-design environmental land management schemes.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-lords.u2	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-08	Gardiner, John Eric	Supports tenant farming productivity improvements	2020-01-08 00:00:00	2020-01-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-19-commons	The Minister will be aware that an earlier version of the European Union withdrawal Act contained provisions that ring-fenced workers’ rights, namely a lock on EU-derived workers’ rights. That would have meant that, before the Government changed workers’ rights, they would rightly have had to consult employer bodies and trade unions. Those measures were removed and we were told to expect them in an upcoming employment Bill, the details of which we are yet to see. Given that the decision made in the UK-EU trade talks will have a huge impact on UK workers, what is the Minister doing to ensure that there is no period of time during which workers are left without sufficient rights in law? Very importantly, what discussions is he having with trade unions and the TUC to ensure that workers are protected?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-19-commons.u204	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-19	Ribeiro-Addy, Bellavia Janet	Protect workers’ rights post-Brexit	2020-05-19 00:00:00	2020-05-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	My Lords, this has been an important discussion on an area that is, of course, of growing concern not just for people in Parliament but for the general public. Noble Lords will also know about my interest in this issue; we have had many discussions over the last few years about it. It is critical that we get this right, to allay any fears—because there are fears that attend to the use and movement of data for various purposes The noble Baroness, Lady Jolly, makes the point in her amendment about the Caldicott principles and so on. I was pleased from the Government’s point of view to be able to bring the National Data Guardian on to a statutory footing, as well as other measures that we took to provide that level of reassurance. My understanding is that these are all part of the scaffolding around the Data Protection Act, which is the GDPR as put into our legislation. They are a way of translating the general provisions of that into healthcare purposes. I ask the Minister to confirm that, because the Bill clearly states that the Data Protection Act is the governing piece of legislation here, it therefore follows that things such as the NDG, the principles and other things apply. They, in effect, derive from that and apply to all aspects of healthcare, including reciprocal healthcare.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u226	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	O’Shaughnessy, James	Data protection in healthcare discussed	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-04-commons	We welcome the statement but, to follow on from my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), an extension will be required to allow permanent secretaries to make decisions should we not have the Assembly up and running by August, and it is highly unlikely that we will have an Assembly by that stage. In the vacuum that has been created, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Antrim (Ian Paisley) highlighted, decisions need to be made, and will have to be made, on a number of strategic issues. Will measures be put in place to ensure that, in August, permanent secretaries can move ahead and make decisions?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-04-commons.u368	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-04	Girvan, William Paul	Request permanent secretaries decision-making extension	2019-06-04 00:00:00	2019-06-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons	I disagree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis). If I were on the other side of this issue and it were a Conservative under question, as I said earlier, I would still think it was an unsuitable appointment The shadow Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz), made points about the panel, the discussions within the Commission and the CV of the lady in question. I have always tried to make it clear that I do not wish to question the lady’s bona fides—it is merely the impartiality issue There is a fundamental point, which the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) raised in his speech: the reason we have lay members is that, for better or worse, the political members were not trusted to sit in judgment upon themselves and therefore needed non-political members. I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden that being a member of a party is something that one should be proud of—it is civic activity. I also think it is perfectly reasonable for people to put their political beliefs behind them. The hon. Member for Rhondda was a member of the Conservative party at university; that does not remain the case, for better or worse. It is merely a question of whether the membership is immediate and close to the point at which the appointment is made.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons.u478	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Disagreeing on appointment impartiality issue	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	A decisive majority of my constituents expect us to leave the European Union on 31 October, in accordance with that historic Brexit vote. However, they do expect the Government to take care of supplies of medicines and to ensure that our health services are protected. Can my right hon. Friend give assurances specifically on the supply of hormone replacement therapy medicines, which are so important for women?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u437	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Maclean, Rachel Helen	Brexit medicine supply assurances	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-06-commons	I point out gently to the hon. Lady that 8% of people who apply for ESA go to appeal, and 4% are overturned. I do not want that to be 2%, 1% or 0.1%; I want us to get the decision right the first time, but we must use the information accurately. It is important that we are evidence-based policy makers. When it comes to who will carry out the assessments from 2021, the healthcare professionals doing so have always been clear that by creating this transformed service and our own digital platform, many more people will be able to come forward to say that they can undertake the services, and I would be particularly happy if NHS trusts said that they would do so.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-06-commons.u210	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-06	Newton, Sarah Louise	Accurate decisions evidence-based policies	2019-03-06 00:00:00	2019-03-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-04-commons	It is clear that confusion remains about who can and cannot go to work. I receive questions every day about whether any given company is essential and, if it is not, whether it should be closed. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to make the current guidance and any future guidance clear? May I suggest that some kind of public information campaign be considered?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-04-commons.u197	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-04	Higginbotham, Antony	Clarify work guidelines please	2020-05-04 00:00:00	2020-05-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-04-lords	My Lords, Downing Street’s director of communications, Lee Cain, said: “We are welcome to brief whoever we want whenever we want” But does the noble Earl not agree that this democratically elected Government are not welcome to ban whatever news outlet or journalist they want whenever they want? What were the criteria for this smaller meeting and where was the transparency? When does a smaller meeting shrink so much that it becomes Dominic Cummings or some other special adviser on his or her own?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-04-lords.u76	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-04	Bonham Carter, Jane	Critique on government transparency criteria	2020-02-04 00:00:00	2020-02-04 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons	The Government have failed to pass the Trade Bill, the Agriculture Bill, the Fisheries Bill, the financial services Bill and the environment Bill, and they have even failed to introduce the EU withdrawal Bill. Does that not show those who think we are ready to leave in a no-deal situation on 12 April that the Government are not prepared for that at all?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons.u74	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Johnson, Diana Ruth	Government unprepared for no-deal Brexit	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords	To clarify in response to the noble Baroness’s question on priorities, there are three priorities that we need to balance in deciding where this funding goes. We want to protect our nationally and internationally significant institutions but we also know that there are important institutions which are critical for our levelling- up agenda in places and communities all round the country, and we also want to prioritise those that are key drivers of economic growth. Therefore, there will be some balancing and some choices to make. On inclusivity, the noble Baroness is right that we will aim to support a diverse range of organisations; funding decisions will look at organisations’ track record of inclusivity as regards audiences and those delivering the arts.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords.u144	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Barran, Diana	Balancing funding priorities inclusivity	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-lords	I thank my noble friend for that question. In her prior role as Secretary of State for International Development, the Minister for Women and Equalities placed great emphasis on this issue, recognising the awful situations my noble friend describes, and moved to lead a global action campaign to end period poverty by 2030 in line with the global goals. It kick-started an allocation of up to £2 million for small and medium-sized charities working on period poverty in DfID’s priority countries. It also builds on the proud record of the UK’s work that is already under way to tackle period poverty globally, and the range of initiatives that different organisations are leading here at home.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-lords.u7	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-21	Williams, Susan	Global action to end period poverty	2019-05-21 00:00:00	2019-05-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons	We have obviously had fantastic news today about the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. May I therefore join the previous two speakers, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon), the Chair of the Education Committee, and urge my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to do what he can within current policy to ensure that teachers are priorities? Does he not agree that were we to vaccinate as many teachers as possible as soon as possible, that would not only make schools safer and boost teacher morale but reduce the pressure to close schools in the first place?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-30	Cartlidge, James Roger	Prioritize vaccinating teachers	2020-12-30 00:00:00	2020-12-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-11-commons	Twenty years ago, the euro came into being. I led the campaign to resist the UK joining the euro. The slogan of the no campaign that we launched was “Europe yes, euro no”. I believed then, and continue to believe, that the UK’s best position was to be in the market but outside the eurozone, and indeed the country prospered over that 20-year period I was also a very strong supporter of the referendum. I played a leading role in the referendum campaign of Conservatives In, and I worked closely with the then Prime Minister. But immediately after the result came in I accepted it, recognising that it was narrow but nevertheless decisive and that it was our duty to implement and honour the decision. I believe that the Prime Minister’s deal does that in a pragmatic manner that recognises that the result was narrow, that the subsequent general election did not produce a decisive result, that the country is divided, and that businesses have significant concerns about the implications of our leaving the EU. I regret that the spirit of pragmatism, which should be embraced by more Members in this House, has become lost in the debate over the past few weeks and months.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-11-commons.u101	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-11	Herbert, Nick	Opposed euro, accepted Brexit result	2019-01-11 00:00:00	2019-01-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons	It is very noticeable that the Prime Minister is still refusing to talk to anyone who might say anything she disagrees with, but we will see what comes out of the talks. Given that it is the clear will of this House that no deal must be avoided and that this Parliament is in the process of passing legislation to prevent no deal from happening, is it tenable for any Minister of the Crown to continue actively to promote a no-deal Brexit that has been rejected by Parliament and was never endorsed by the people in the first place?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons.u66	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Grant, Peter	Anti no-deal Brexit stance	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-commons	This spending round is focused on day-to-day resource spending. The hon. Lady may know that some very important investments that will need to be made on decarbonisation will be capital investments and that is just not covered today, but that does not mean to say it is not going to happen and is not taken seriously. However, one step that we have taken today is to provide more funding to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to work with the Treasury on the decarbonisation plan to meet the net 2050 targets; there is additional funding of £30 million to work on that programme. There are also other measures I have announced today that would help—for example, the £200 million on ultra-low emission buses. I hope the hon. Lady would welcome that, too.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-commons.u222	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-04	Javid, Sajid	Decarbonisation investment plan funding announced	2019-09-04 00:00:00	2019-09-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-lords	My Lords, the Royal Statistical Society has found that the government system used to report pay gaps is flawed in some important respects, open to gaming and very difficult for people to understand. Can the Government please look at this and consider implementing some of the recommendations, such as introducing online gender pay gap reporting calculators with built-in sanity checks, to ensure accurate reporting and to prevent implausible entries?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-lords.u42	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-08	Burt, Lorely	Flawed pay gap reporting system	2019-05-08 00:00:00	2019-05-08 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons	I can assure the hon. Lady that the Government are absolutely doing that and that the Department is pushing ahead with ensuring that unsafe cladding is removed as a priority. It has clear targets to do that. The debate has just taken place in Westminster Hall and, therefore, that is something that has been taken note of by the Government. So we have had the debate, but I can assure her that the Government take this matter properly seriously.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons.u258	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-13	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Government prioritizing cladding removal	2020-02-13 00:00:00	2020-02-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-27-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for his introduction and the very helpful letter and factsheet he sent us yesterday. However, I must say I found the Explanatory Memorandum to this SI even more interesting—and much more revealing. The obtuse title of the SI hides a lot of important issues, but in the limited time available I will confine myself to a few questions to the Minister As he said, we have already agreed four Sis, in 2018 and 2019, on this subject in preparation for a no-deal exit from the EU, which could now come into force on 31 December. As I understand it, we have six SIs to amend those because of the withdrawal agreement: four already laid and two more still to come. We do not know yet if there will be a deal or no deal, so can the Minister explain how we will deal with these SIs if there is a deal, and if there is no deal This instrument deals with a wide variety of important matters, as the Minister said, including noise emissions by outdoor equipment, aerosol dispensers, toy safety, lifts, recreational craft—including motorboats—gas appliances, and PPE, yet there was no formal consultation on this. Why not? This instrument also covers the important issue of firework safety and the designation of an approved body for pyrotechnics. Interestingly, maybe astonishingly, it allows for it to be based in any country—the UK, in the EU or in the rest of the world, presumably including China. Can the Minister explain why the present arrangement is not acceptable The regulations also provide for unlimited fines for the misuse of what are complicated product safety rules, but the Government say they will be used rarely. How can they make such a prediction This is just one of hundreds of such SIs from this and other departments taking up the valuable time of capable officials, which could be better spent elsewhere. And it is all because of the chaos and confusion arising from a bungled and unnecessary exit from the European Union market—a market that was working well.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-27-lords.u67	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-27	Foulkes, George	Concerns over SI and Brexit	2020-11-27 00:00:00	2020-11-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons	We will have exactly such a thing. We will have a points-based system that will deliver the immigration that this whole country needs. The way to boost the population of Scotland is not to have a Scottish Government who tax the population to oblivion and who fail to deliver results in their schools. It may interest you to know, Mr Speaker, that the SNP has not had a debate in its Parliament on education for two years—and what is it debating today? Whether or not to fly the EU flag. It should get on with the day job.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons.u101	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-29	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Points-based immigration system advocated	2020-01-29 00:00:00	2020-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-lords	My Lords, I support the making of both orders but shall speak only to the Crown Court order. My only reservation is that it may be too limited in its scope to meet effectively the stated objective of increasing transparency in our judicial system and public engagement with, and understanding of, what happens in our courts It has taken a long time to reach this modest stage. I well remember the consultation carried out by the Labour Government in 2005. At that stage I had been a magistrate and was the Opposition spokesperson on home affairs and, from time to time, matters covered by the Department for Constitutional Affairs The Crown Court order will authorise only certain judges sitting in the Crown Court to permit the recording and broadcasting of their sentencing remarks. The judges will be High Court judges, senior circuit judges who are also the resident judge of a Crown Court centre, or a senior circuit judge whose base court is the Central Criminal Court. All circuit judges have a base court but may sit at other courts. The permanent judges based at the Central Criminal Court are senior circuit judges, but other non-senior circuit judges may be requested to sit there from time to time. Those other judges will be excluded from the provisions of this order High Court judges and senior circuit judges preside over trials of class 1 offences, which include murder, attempted murder, rape and other serious sexual offences, but other circuit judges may be authorised to try some of these offences too. On occasion, Crown Court judges are criticised by the police—sorry, by the public—and the press for the perceived inadequacy of their sentences. Perhaps my slip of the tongue may be true as well, judging by the source of some criticism. Sentences in certain types of offence, in particular, often attract a public outcry or criticism: for example, not only those given for serious sexual offences such as rape but for other sexual offences too. Some serious sexual offences are tried before non-senior circuit judges or, indeed, as mentioned earlier today, before recorders. Sentences in such cases will be excluded from the provisions of this order. For clarity, I do not refer to the honorary recorders of major city Crown Courts who are senior circuit judges—for example, Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds, to name but a few Other sentences that attract a lot of public attention, and sometimes a strong emotional response leading to open criticism, are those for causing death by dangerous or careless driving. These offences are frequently tried before non-senior circuit judges or, again, on occasion before recorders. These sentences, too, would be excluded under the provisions of this order. There would be considerable benefit to the judiciary and the public if the reasons for such sentences could be recorded and broadcast. It would promote even better transparency and enable the public to have a better understanding of the judge’s reasoning and all the factors taken into consideration Accordingly, while I welcome the Crown Court order, I hope that my noble and learned friend the Minister may be able to reassure me that the provisions of this order are just a first step—more than just the putting of the tip of a toe in the water; I want to see the whole foot and more in there—and that these measures may be extended in due course to the decisions of a wider category of judges.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-08-lords.u148	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-08	Anelay, Joyce	Support for broader judicial transparency	2020-06-08 00:00:00	2020-06-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons	Everyone in this country has benefited one way or another from what we have been able to do. Although people have not been able to be helped in exactly the way they would have liked, we have been able to put in place measures unprecedented in scale and speed, and that meant we did have to make some difficult decisions to implement those policies. None the less, I do believe that, because of the measures that we have taken to strengthen our safety net, for example, everyone, no matter where they are, has access to more support than they did before this crisis began.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons.u20	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-07	Sunak, Rishi	We benefited from unprecedented measures	2020-07-07 00:00:00	2020-07-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons	I thank the right hon. Lady for her questions. She will know—I have said this at the Dispatch Box before—that we estimate about 900 people of national security interest left the UK at some point to join terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq. We estimate that about 40% have returned and approximately 20% have died in the region. Of those who have returned, in every case we know of they have been investigated. Where there is enough evidence, they have been prosecuted for their actions The right hon. Lady will also understand that the part of the world they are in is a very lawless and dangerous place, so it is not always possible—in fact, it is incredibly difficult—to gather evidence of their activities that could be used to try to have a successful prosecution, either in the UK or in the other countries with which we work closely. If we have evidence, we can help to bring about prosecutions either at home or with our allies. In each case, we work carefully with them. It is always the case that the preferred outcome is always one of justice, where there is evidence and we can be sure that there can be proper legal proceedings and proper hearings. Our preference in many of cases is to see if more people can be tried in the region. As I mentioned earlier to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke), we are working with a number of other countries to see if more work can be done together. Sadly, this challenge is not unique to the UK but is shared across many countries including our European friends The right hon. Lady referred to other cases, as did the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Sir Edward Davey). She knows that at any time any decision made by any Minister can rightfully be challenged by anyone in court. That is their right. But it would be wrong to take one particular case that may have been in the courts and apply it to all other potential cases that follow. It is worth repeating that where legal cases may have an impact, our own legal advisers, who are incredibly experienced and take these issues very seriously, would of course take them into account The right hon. Lady referred to the UN declaration of human rights. We absolutely abide by that and it is incredibly important that all Governments abide by it. She quoted the declaration by saying that no one should be made stateless. That is absolutely correct. No one should ever be made stateless and that is not something we would ever do. We would never take a deprivation decision if someone, as a British national, has only one nationality. We would not do that. We would not leave anyone stateless. She also suggested that these decisions are somehow arbitrary. As I said to the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Sir Edward Davey), each decision is taken incredibly seriously. The facts are weighed on a case-by-case basis. It is anything but arbitrary.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons.u251	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-20	Javid, Sajid	Terrorist returns investigated, prosecuted, evidence crucial	2019-02-20 00:00:00	2019-02-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons	I certainly share the opinions of my right hon. Friend in all senses. The sympathies of the Leader of the Opposition with the likes of Maduro are very distressing. Clearly, in terms of his sentiment, he finds himself more in line with Cuba, China and Russia than he does with all democrats across the world.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons.u198	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-28	Duncan, Alan James Carter	Opposition leader supports autocracies	2019-01-28 00:00:00	2019-01-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons	My hon. Friend raises the important issue of informed consent, which has come very much to the fore recently, including how detailed consent needs to be and how much information people need to have. Of course we are working with those women and ensuring that they have every detail and every bit of information that they require before mesh is removed so that they know exactly what operation they are undergoing. That needs to be a template for moving forward. Informed consent needs to be what we move forward with in much more detail, so patients are fully aware of the risks and benefits of any surgical procedure they are undergoing.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons.u307	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-09	Dorries, Nadine Vanessa	Informed consent essential for surgeries	2020-07-09 00:00:00	2020-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons	The tourism sector has been severely impacted by this crisis, and we are working closely with the sector to get it back on its feet, including developing covid-secure reopening guidance for tourism businesses. VisitBritain has introduced an industry-standard quality mark called “We’re Good to Go”, which businesses can use if they meet covid-secure guidelines, and it has had over 20,000 applications already. The new £10 million kick-start tourism package gives small businesses in tourist destinations grants of up to £5,000 to help them adapt their businesses.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons.u3	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-09	Huddleston, Nigel Paul	Supporting tourism industry's recovery	2020-07-09 00:00:00	2020-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons	I have a few things to explain before we begin Committee stage. For understandable reasons, a large number of manuscript amendments have been tabled by the Government today, and in fact a large number of other manuscript amendments have, unusually, been allowed today as well. Members therefore need to make sure that they are working from the right version of the notice paper and that they have the latest version of the grouping and selection list, although I should explain that there is one group Government amendments 79 to 82 on extradition are on a separate supplementary notice paper, and a revised grouping and selection list will be issued shortly. The late appearance of these amendments is due not to Government action but to a mistake on the part of the Public Bill Office, but, lest anybody complain, I will defend the Public Bill Office, because they have done a marvellous job today. I have seen it over the last few days, and the people who work here have worked miracles to get us to this stage in such good order The Business of the House motion, which the House agreed before Second Reading, allows the Chair discretion at the end of the time allowed for Committee—in this case, that falls at exactly 10 pm—to call non-Government amendments and new clauses to be moved formally at that stage for separate decision. I have to tell the Committee that my sense of where we are at this stage is that I will call Divisions only when they are really essential. As always, the Chair will listen to the debate and form a judgment on whether to exercise that discretion. I am simply informing the Committee now that today the bar is a high one—no one will be surprised to hear that—and that arguments in favour of going through the Division Lobbies tonight will need to be very persuasive Clause 1 Meaning of “coronavirus” and related terminology Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons.u333	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-23	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Procedural updates: amendments, voting discretion	2020-03-23 00:00:00	2020-03-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons	Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker We will also ensure that those who have sadly lost their jobs are supported back into work as quickly as possible. We will do that by expanding work search and doubling the number of work coaches, so that jobseekers will benefit from high-quality personalised one-to-one support. We will also invest £32 million of new funding over two years to expand the National Careers Service, and we will prioritise support for young people who have not only had to contend with disruption to their education but must now enter the workforce at an extremely difficult moment. The £2 billion kick-start scheme will create hundreds of thousands of new fully subsidised quality jobs for young people aged 16 to 24 who are claiming universal credit and are at the highest risk of long-term unemployment There will be new money to invest in schools in England, including tripling the number of sector-based work academy placements and traineeships, and giving all 18 and 19-year-olds the opportunity to study targeted high-value level 2 or 3 courses when no employment opportunities are forthcoming. Furthermore, we will introduce a new youth offer for young people on universal credit, in the form of 13 weeks of intensive support, including referral to work-related training or apprenticeships together with tailored support and coaching for those who need it The Government’s immediate focus is on jobs, but our recovery is also an opportunity to renew our commitment to the UK’s long-term prosperity. Six months ago the Government were returned to office by an electorate tired and frustrated by deadlock and delay. Thousands of people in dozens of constituencies lent the Conservative party their vote for the first time because we promised to leave the European Union, unleash the potential of the economy and level up investment and opportunity across the United Kingdom. Those commitments have not changed, and this Government are determined to repay the trust placed in us by bringing about meaningful change to people’s lives Last week, the Prime Minister outlined how the United Kingdom could bounce back from this crisis, stronger and better than before, with new jobs and new industries in every region. Together with the plans set out by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor today, this means we will bring forward £8.6 billion of capital investment in infrastructure projects that will support thousands of jobs. That includes more than £1.5 billion for hospital upgrades and maintenance this year, and as the Prime Minister announced last week, we will allocate £1 billion to begin rebuilding schools in England, £142 million to modernise courtrooms and £83 million to invest in the prison estate. Meanwhile, we are working to put in place a new generation of roads, railways and fibre-optic cables to bind the country closer together and unleash the economic potential of the regions.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons.u340	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Jobs and infrastructure investments	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons	I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend, because it was at her prompting that I originally asked the Office for National Statistics to look at how we measure and value human capital to ensure that there is no systematic bias against human capital in favour of physical capital. The ONS has in fact delivered its draft report, and the question of how we measure and value human capital will be at the centre of the spending review process.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons.u178	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-21	Hammond, Philip	Human capital measurement initiative	2019-05-21 00:00:00	2019-05-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-lords	Without giving a specific commitment about Thursday, because I have a number of things in my diary, not least because I am answering further Questions in this House, I will attempt to ensure that the forum mentioned by the noble Baroness takes place before Report. Noble Lords who take an interest in this matter will get the opportunity to talk to me and the various Bill officials who are handling what is, I am sure she will accept, a complicated area of law.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-lords.u194	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-16	Callanan, Martin	Forum likely before Report stage	2020-06-16 00:00:00	2020-06-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons	The Iranian Foreign Minister has been issuing plaintive appeals on social media for medical supplies to assist in his sanctions-hit country. Setting aside Javad Zarif’s accompanying rant against America, what does my right hon. Friend think can be done to assist the people of Iran at this difficult time, particularly around sanctions, the joint comprehensive plan of action and the International Military Services debt?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons.u164	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Murrison, Andrew William	Assisting Iran amid sanctions	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons	Flybe flies from Leeds Bradford airport in West Yorkshire to the likes of Newquay, Southampton and Belfast. Passengers have very little alternative until we see major investment in regional and cross-country rail. Does the Minister agree that until that happens, we need to keep investing in our regional infrastructure, and we also need to crack on with trans-Pennine rail?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons.u173	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-14	McCartney, Jason	Support regional infrastructure investment	2020-01-14 00:00:00	2020-01-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons	My hon. Friend reiterates a number of important points. He is right that this requires urgent consideration, and I have confirmed that the Government are looking at the position and want to help ensure that there is clarity. In this House, we are legislators; we are responsible for looking at the law and whether it is clear. As to the regulator’s responsibility to provide usable guidance promptly, I observe again that the Electoral Commission is separately accountable to the House. There have been questions tonight from my hon. Friend and others that the House will wish to satisfy itself of for its oversight of the Electoral Commission, which, as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, is through the Speaker’s Committee. I encourage Members to direct some of their questions to that source. That is the right thing to do What I can talk about is the Government’s next steps, so let me add something in relation to the codes of practice that I have mentioned. First, the commission concluded its public consultation on them in December 2018, and Ministers will review those draft codes before they are put to Parliament. Again, I emphasise that because that is the right and proper opportunity for the Government to contribute their part, but also for this Parliament to do so. The commission aims to have them approved by Parliament in time for elections in 2021. The Government will continue to work with the Electoral Commission on the statutory codes of practice, because we recognise the importance of having clear and accessible codes to provide further clarity on electoral spending.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons.u450	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Smith, Chloe Rebecca	Government reviewing electoral clarity measures	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons	Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am pleased to stand here, and feel humbled, to make my maiden speech as the new Member of Parliament for the area that I have called home all my life. I want to thank the constituents in Vauxhall for voting for me and placing their trust in me My predecessor represented Vauxhall for 30 years. As many right hon. and hon. Members in this House will know, she was one of the most vocal supporters of Brexit. But Kate was much more than just a vocal Brexiteer—she was a diligent, hard-working constituency MP who fought very hard for her constituents. I hope to build on her work locally and I pledge to represent the residents of Vauxhall to the best of my ability My constituency is home to a diverse community. Across our schools in Vauxhall, including my old primary school of St Helen’s in Brixton, there are over 50 languages spoken by children of migrants from all parts of the world who have made this area their home. We have vibrant Portuguese, Jamaican, Ghanaian, Ecuadorian and Italian communities who run a number of small businesses and restaurants in the area. Vauxhall also has a proud history of an active LGBTQ community. I would like to place on the record my thanks for the contribution of the Royal Vauxhall Tavern in supporting and providing a safe space for our friends there. I am also proud to highlight the work of the 1997 Labour Government, who broke the Thatcherite legacy that hurt so many men and women in Vauxhall so badly through section 28. My constituency also has many famous national landmarks and buildings, including the London Eye, the National Theatre, the Young Vic, the Southbank Centre, the Kia Oval cricket ground, and the home of MI6 I am pleased to be making my maiden speech today in this part of the debate on the Queen’s Speech because, like many hon. Members in this House, health and social care is very close to my heart. My late mother suffered from a disease called sickle cell anaemia, and in later life she developed renal failure and had to attend dialysis three times a week. The average life expectancy for sickle patients is between 42 and 47 years old, and many experience complications with childbirth. My mother was a fighter and she instilled in my sisters and me the values of standing up for what you believe in My mother also taught me how to make jollof rice. For any of you who have not tasted that, I want to put on the record now that Nigerian jollof rice is the best. As a young girl, I would watch my mother in pain going through a sickle crisis, but somehow she would still find the strength to help my sisters and me get ready for school and support us with our homework. I know the real value of the NHS. Without the amazing care of the haematology and renal team at King’s College Hospital, and my mother’s faith in God, she would not have lived to the age of 60 St Thomas’s Hospital in my constituency is also close to my heart. I never imagined that almost five years to the day, as I was literally pacing up and down the maternity ward, looking over the river, trying to coerce my daughter to come out, I would now be sat in this Parliament fighting for funding for our hard-working doctors and nurses The NHS is struggling to cope with the increase in demand for health and social care. The A&E department at St Thomas’s is treating more patients than ever before. Attendance has risen by two thirds since 2018. The staff are now seeing 600 patients on their busiest days compared with an average of 420 when the new emergency department opened in 2018. So what is driving this increase? A significant number of patients are presenting with serious mental health problems, there is a high number of homeless people with complex health needs, and the number of children attending the Evelina Hospital A&E continues to rise. In November and December, it had a record attendance, with 130 children seen in one single day—more than double the number seen in four years. With an ageing population and more complex needs adding so many cost pressures to the budgets, I hope that this Government will make sure that increasing funding to the NHS is a top priority. That is why I will be voting to support Labour’s amendment later this afternoon I got involved in politics to give a voice to people who feel that politics is not for them or that politics does not matter. I have spent a large part of my career working with young people, including the young people who society is quick to demonise and stereotype. Last Tuesday, I was one of the first people on the scene following a stabbing incident that took place just over the border of my constituency. I made the frantic phone call to the emergency services, as I and two other members of the public tried to stem the flow of blood from the young boy who had been stabbed. I later found out that that young boy was 15 years old. I was scared. I was sad, because some members of the public walked past. We cannot allow ourselves to become desensitised to the issue of knife crime. Young people in my constituency are being groomed for violence, and there has been an increase in fatal stabbings over recent years I firmly believe that, to tackle this issue, we need to understand the root causes of the problem. Evidence from various commissions, including the recent work led by my hon. Friends the Members for Croydon Central (Sarah Jones) and for Lewisham, Deptford (Vicky Foxcroft), shows that the vast majority of young people involved in knife crime have suffered childhood trauma. Mental health services for our young people have not been adequately funded, and I hope that the Government will make a commitment to reverse the cuts and support our young people at risk In this Parliament, I will continue to speak up for investment in youth services and creating positive opportunities for our young people, so that they do not see selling drugs as a way to make money. I will continue to speak up and challenge the Home Office to invest in our police service, so that it has the resources to catch the people who continue to exploit our vulnerable young people. And I will continue to champion and speak up for the young women and girls who are facing sexual exploitation. The people of Vauxhall have placed their trust in me, and I pledge to represent their interests and concerns to the best of my ability for as long as I am in this House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons.u345	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-16	Eshalomi, Florence	Maiden speech highlights Vauxhall priorities	2020-01-16 00:00:00	2020-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons	It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart). Today’s debate comes at a crossroads in our island’s story. In the 1950s, US Secretary of State Dean Acheson said: “Great Britain has lost an empire and has not yet found a role. ” The role we eventually found for half a century was in the European Union, and now our citizens have decided in aggregate that we leave the European Union and forge a new destination. What is that to be Global Britain, at the moment, is a slogan in search of a strategy, and it is the duty of this Government and all of us to bring it alive. I welcome the announcement of the security, defence and foreign policy review and lots of work in other Departments, and I hope that the Budget will pivot to boosting Departments that can deliver a more global Britain. The good news is that we have most of the ingredients already. It is now about the recipe and how we bring them together Here are some of the key elements beyond language, law, history and the Commonwealth. Domestically, we are the top destination for foreign direct investment in Europe. Last year, we had more investment in technology than the US or China. We have a strong domestic starting point for engagement with the world. Abroad, as a result of a significant change made by this Government, some £12 billion of funds used through the Department for International Development has achieved remarkable things—since 2015, some 76 million children have been immunised, and some 60 million women, children and girls have benefited from nutrition programmes We now have in the Department for International Trade, so recently created, more trade negotiators than the US Trade Representative. We have exports that have risen 22% in the last three years—now over £654 billion—and that are contributing 30% or almost a third of our GDP, up from 27%. We now have in our diplomacy 14 new posts and, I believe, the greatest global diplomatic coverage of any nation in the world. On issues such as the environment, we are now hosting the climate change summit, COP26, in Glasgow When it comes to sport and culture, we are leading in so many ways, whether in films, TV, the premier league, singers—you name it. Our values have never been forgotten. We are leading on Christians in danger, media freedoms and girls in education, as well as the campaign against rape as a weapon of war, as mentioned earlier by my hon. Friend the Member for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall). So we do have much to build on.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons.u449	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Graham, Richard Michael John Ogilvie	Forge post-EU global identity	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons	I have a certain fondness for the right hon. Gentleman, stemming from our time on the restoration and renewal Committee some years ago. I will tell him what is constitutionally irregular: shutting down Parliament, shutting down debate and shutting down the ability of MPs to hold this Government to account. Can he therefore tell me when he became aware of the Prime Minister’s plan to shut down Parliament in order to force through a no-deal Brexit? Papers in the Court of Session today suggest that this was the Prime Minister’s plan on 16 August.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons.u431	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Gray, Neil Charles	Condemnation of Parliament shutdown	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams). My only point on the second referendum she is calling for is that I am not quite sure anyone in this country would believe that that would be honoured either, bearing in mind that the first has not been honoured for three and a half years I welcome the Queen’s Speech; it contains a raft of domestic measures that for too long have not been given the attention they should have been, not because we have not wanted to give them attention, but simply because Brexit has consumed all our energy and time. However, from the end of March this year, that should not have been the case. The fact that it has continued is down to the antics of MPs from all sides of the House who have done, and continue to do, their utmost to prevent our departure from the EU. There is, of course, a handful of exceptions who genuinely wish to leave with a deal, but let me tell them that we all want to leave with a deal. However, we voted to leave the EU, deal or no deal, and that must now be done on 31 October It is to the shame of the House that the so-called surrender Bill was passed, and with such undue haste. A pernicious piece of legislation, its aim was to undermine Brexit and our negotiating position, which it has done. The Prime Minister has called on the Opposition parties to throw themselves on the mercy of the electorate and, unsurprisingly, they refuse to do so. They bang on about democracy, but they are terrified of it. That is the truth. As I have said, the Queen’s Speech touches on many important areas. We heard from my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary this morning that we will take a far more robust approach to crime. I applaud the proposal for an additional 20,000 police officers, having argued for them for many years. Dorset’s share in the first year is 50, and it is vital that we get the extra 120 in the following two years if the formula is to be followed. I would like to pay tribute to Dorset’s police officers, all of whom do great credit to their force. I know for a fact that these extra officers will be welcomed and are desperately needed I would be failing in my duty if I did not mention our prison officers, who often feel like the forgotten army. They must not be forgotten by this Government, and we must continue to ensure that they have the support and numbers they need to do the job. While talking about those in uniform, I want also to pay tribute to our armed forces. A former soldier myself, I welcome the new Office for Veterans Affairs, which is aimed at better co-ordinating care for our veterans, many of whom need our help. I pay special tribute to the former soldier Andy Price, who has established a help centre and garden in Weymouth. It has been hugely successful, and Andy is now considering applying for charitable status I was concerned that there was no measure in the Queen’s Speech to stop the ongoing witch hunt against our veterans, especially those who served in Northern Ireland decades ago. However, I was encouraged by the reply that the Prime Minister gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart) on Monday. I remind the Prime Minister that we are not asking for a statute of limitations. We simply want there to be a presumption against further prosecution when a case has already been investigated and when there is no new evidence. I attended a rally in Parliament Square recently, and there is genuine anger among our veterans and their families that this injustice has still not been resolved. It must be. I am glad to read that the defence budget will continue to meet NATO’s 2% requirement. There is no doubt that more money is needed, not least to ensure that our brave men and women are housed properly and decently The national infrastructure strategy and plans for a White Paper on how to unleash regional potential are welcome announcements, and nowhere is the former more needed and the latter being more promoted than in South Dorset. A new business-led panel that I initiated has been taken on by Bill Reeves, the chief executive of Portland Port, to whom I am most grateful and owe so much. Under his dynamic leadership, more and more people are getting involved in the panel’s aim to create and deliver a strategy that attracts more investment, more businesses and better jobs. Coastal towns such as Swanage and Weymouth, and the island of Portland, cannot do it on their own. We need at least a fair slice of the infrastructure cake, crying out as we are for better road, rail and broadband connectivity. Our biggest drawback is that our conurbations are relatively small and often do not meet the Government’s criteria, but those guidelines must change if coastal resorts are going to survive, as they should and must. I should like to thank the Minister for the Northern Powerhouse and Local Growth, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Jake Berry) for responding so rapidly to my invitation to visit us recently. Rest assured we will be chasing him and his Department in the months ahead I would be failing in my duty if I did not mention farmers, and I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I meet with farmers every quarter, and there is genuine concern about Brexit and the effect that it will have on them. There is an appreciation that public moneys will be available for public good. There is also a need for support in the face of possible punitive tariffs. We would all be grateful—I note that the Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Zac Goldsmith) is on the Front Bench—if the Government fleshed out exactly what support will be available, particularly in the event of no deal. The fishing community is also worried about its future, and the sooner we take back control of our waters, the better Affordable housing is a pressing issue in South Dorset. We have seen imaginative new housing developments where house builders use a range of materials to lower the cost. “Affordable homes” is not a popular phrase in my constituency, because they are simply not affordable, so we must deal with that issue. While on housing, can we please look at density? All too often there are too many houses and not nearly enough green space. More money for health and education is to be welcomed, of course, but we cannot ignore the shortage of nurses. We need more home-grown nurses, who are essential for the future of the NHS There are many more issues that I would like to cover, but my time, regrettably, is running out. I will end where I started by saying that if some MPs have doubts about the direction of travel in this place, let us trust the people and let them decide in a general election.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons.u195	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-16	Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, Richard Grosvenor	Support Brexit, address domestic issues	2019-10-16 00:00:00	2019-10-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons	He is shaking his head before he receives the answer—I thought we were going to have a sensible debate about the pros and cons of this change. I listened carefully to what he said, so he might do me that courtesy in return. We had an integrated approach, and we brought the alignment as far as we conceivably could on covid, the repatriation of nationals, the hunt for a vaccine, and keeping supply chains open. However, this situation has brought to light and made clear to us how much more effective we can be if we integrate through this merger The hon. Gentleman asked when the Prime Minister made the final decision. Obviously he spent weeks considering it, but he announced the change on Tuesday, swiftly after the conclusions had been resolved. The hon. Gentleman asked whether the aid budget will be protected, and we are committed to the figure of 0.7% of gross national income—I think that reassures those who are concerned that somehow the aid budget will be cut as a result of this change, which is not true The hon. Gentleman asked about DIT and trade, and as the Prime Minister made clear on Tuesday, we will ensure that our trade envoys are responsible for formally reporting to ambassadors and high commissioners in their respective countries. More broadly, the International Trade Secretary, who answered questions in the House a few moments ago, is doing an exceptional job in striking those free trade deals, which are a great opportunity for businesses and consumers in this country. That will continue. The hon. Gentleman also mentioned third party support. There has been widespread agreement on this from the Chair of the Select Committee, from my predecessor as Foreign Secretary, and from the HALO Trust, which is a charity that deals with landmines and welcomes this move I will leave the hon. Gentleman with one thought: of OECD developed countries, only one has a separate Ministry of Development. Indeed, the tide has been in the direction of integrating foreign policy with aid and development, as that is the progressive thing to do. I understand why the Labour party, which set up DFID, feels proprietorial about it, but what matters is the effectiveness of foreign policy. What we have learned during coronavirus is that this merger will ensure that we can be as effective as possible, and deliver more efficient value for taxpayers’ money.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons.u150	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-18	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Support for merger and integration	2020-06-18 00:00:00	2020-06-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords	My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that in 1997, Hong Kong represented 30% of Hong Kong and China’s GDP but now represents 3% because of the growth of China? Does she agree that this reflects on Hong Kong’s influence and leverage here? Does she note that the noble Lord, Lord Patten of Barnes, said that the provisions of this Bill are, “an assault on Hong Kong’s values, stability and security” Further, does she note that its Second Reading may be held regardless of people’s protests tomorrow, and that within a few days—perhaps 10 days—it may pass all its stages? What further action can the Government take?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords.u71	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-11	Granshaw, Lindsay	Hong Kong GDP decline influence concerns	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	The outpouring of grief for Lyra from her friends and from right across the community stands as a testimony to the wonderful kind person that Lyra was. I had the privilege of knowing Lyra personally. Indeed, she reached out to me and showed me great kindness at a very difficult time in my life. That is the sort of story that we have heard about Lyra. That is the person that she was. I know that I speak for so many of her friends today when I say that I just cannot believe that we are sadly talking about her death and her murder. Her testimony stands in direct contrast to the violent thugs who killed her and those who have attempted to justify that. There have been disgraceful, repugnant displays on the streets of Dublin and Belfast, and propaganda on social media. What actions will the Secretary of State take to ensure that these organisations cannot continue to spread the hate and the bile and to recruit more young people?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u446	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Little Pengelly, Emma	Condemnation of Lyra's murder	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons	We are working closely with the insurance industry, and obviously events companies are underpinned by contractual obligations. We established that if they have cover relevant to non-specified diseases, the announcements by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor have triggered those policies to be paid out, but I am happy to look at any specific cases that individual Members want to bring to me, which I can take up with industry representatives.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons.u114	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Glen, John Philip	Insurance policy triggers addressed	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	I thank the Financial Secretary for providing a copy of his statement in advance, and for his reference to Henry VIII. I must say that the Government are obsessed with Henry VIII, and with all the powers that they are using in that connection As has been recognised by the Federation of Small Businesses, the Labour party has consistently called on the Government to rethink their making tax digital policy, not least because our manifesto commits us to scrapping quarterly reporting for companies under the VAT threshold. The Opposition’s concerns are therefore well versed. We have raised them during numerous debates in relation to numerous pieces of legislation, announcements, delays and, indeed, U-turns. Unfortunately, we are here again today, addressing the Government’s absolute failure to handle the digital transition—a failure that has serious consequences for businesses throughout the country Let me make it clear that we fully support digitalised tax reporting, which we all agree has the potential to drastically reduce the time that individuals and business owners have to spend filling out long and complicated tax returns. We are also aware of the productivity gains that it will bring, to which the Financial Secretary referred. If handled correctly, it could make positive changes in the way in which people report their tax position for decades to come. However, the stakeholders to whom we have spoken in the business sector and the tax community continue to raise deep concerns about their ability to be ready for digital VAT reporting, and they have expressed those concerns to the Treasury Committee Owners of small and medium-sized businesses are already worried about the stark changes that they will have to make in 2019 to prepare for Brexit. They are worried about the possibility of a no-deal scenario and the overnight effect that it would have on costs and supply chains. There is also the potential introduction of tariffs and the impact on staff who are EU citizens. The Government have continuously failed to provide the certainty that is needed, so it is little wonder that business confidence is pretty low What is more, few people inside or outside the Government believe that HMRC is actually ready. To the best of my knowledge, it has the same problems as many of the businesses that will be required to begin digital reporting in 2019. Those concerns are echoed by tax professionals, who emphasise that the current timetable is unrealistic and unworkable for HMRC and the business community. That is why the Opposition propose a delay in the introduction of digital reporting for VAT and income tax purposes until the end of the current Parliament in 2022, assuming that it lasts that long. Such a delay would give HMRC and small and medium-sized businesses the time that they need to prepare adequately and to implement new software in their businesses. Notwith- standing today’s announcement, there is a risk that the Government’s current timetable will bring chaos and confusion unless the concerns of the business community are fully addressed I should be grateful if the Minister would answer the following questions. Are any further costs anticipated as a result of today’s announcement? Is the delay in the implementation of making tax digital in any way connected with the so-called estate transformation—or downsizing—of HMRC, which has seen 170 regional offices merged into 13 “regional centres”? Is there not a need for in-house provision of making tax digital software, given the bespoke nature of HMRC’s UK-specific needs and the need to co-ordinate with other Departments? Under what legal authority or process has HMRC outsourced provision of that software A total of 0.5% of eligible businesses—one in 200—have signed up to making tax digital. Is the Financial Secretary confident that all the businesses will have signed up by the end of the Parliament? He says that he wants to listen to business, but I am afraid he is not listening hard enough, and the rosy picture that he has painted is not quite as rosy as he thinks. He need only ask businesses.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u317	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Dowd, Peter Christopher	Criticism of digital tax policy	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords	I thank the Minister for that. As he said, there were 40 sessions of negotiations last week , but I am afraid that we heard from both sides about the difficulties and the lack of progress. There was even a slight hint of bad faith—this at a time when there are dire consequences to our trade and finance because of Covid. Given that the Government’s chief negotiator is not a Minister and so is not answerable to Parliament, can this Minister, the noble Lord, Lord True, confirm that the Government are genuinely prioritising a deal, as envisaged in the political declaration? Will he give serious consideration to releasing the legal texts that he has mentioned to assist the House in its work? Can he also say whether the Prime Minister’s original Brexit blueprint has in any way changed in the light of the new economic circumstances?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords.u24	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-28	Hayter, Dianne	Questioning Brexit deal progress	2020-04-28 00:00:00	2020-04-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-30-lords	My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Campbell, mentioned attacks from inside Yemen into Saudi Arabia. Responsibility for these attacks was claimed by the Houthis. It is understood that they most probably do not actually have the ability to launch such attacks. The fact is that what we have to look at is the arms supply coming out of Iran to the Houthis. Iran must comply with the UN Security Council in banning all imports of arms to the Houthis in Yemen.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-30-lords.u53	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-30	Stopford, James	Iran arming Houthis in Yemen	2019-10-30 00:00:00	2019-10-30 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-30-lords	My Lords, I declare my interest as chair of the National Housing Federation, representing not-for-profit housing associations in England. This crisis cannot be allowed to entrench inequalities for generations to come. The OBR predicts that the crisis will cause the UK economy to shrink by 35%, with 2 million job losses—a potential economic disaster There are so many examples of organisations, including housing associations, working flat out to provide immediate support to soften the financial impact of this pandemic, but some people will still be in dire hardship. The Government have acted swiftly to secure incomes in the short term, but Ministers must do more to support people on the very lowest incomes I have two questions: will the Minister commit to suspending the housing benefit cap, and, echoing the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham, to ensuring that all rough sleepers have a permanent home once social distancing is ended?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-30-lords.u181	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-30	Warwick, Diana Mary	Suspend housing benefit cap	2020-04-30 00:00:00	2020-04-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	I find this urgent question from the Opposition somewhat bizarre, as only last Thursday the Opposition Brexit spokesperson, the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), said that he had no problems with the backstop at all. For the avoidance of doubt, will the Solicitor General confirm again that the Government stand firmly behind all their commitments on the Belfast Good Friday agreement?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u200	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Ford, Victoria Grace	Opposition's inconsistency on backstop	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-lords	My Lords, my understanding from the trust is that that is exactly its intention. The overwhelming majority of the 22,442 names on the memorial will be British, but troops of 38 different nationalities will be commemorated. Predominantly they were from Commonwealth countries and Europe, but there is also provision to record the contribution of the Merchant Navy, French agents who were parachuted in to observe German movements and the SOE, as well as war correspondents.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-lords.u15	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Curzon, Frederick Richard Penn	British and international war commemoration	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-commons	I know my hon. Friend has been campaigning on this matter for some time and has met Ministers to discuss it. I understand that the area is about to benefit from refurbished modern trains on the Crewe to Derby line from December this year, as part of the new east midlands rail franchise. The Department for Transport will have heard my hon. Friend’s call to reopen the station at Meir, and I know that he will continue to campaign on behalf of all his constituents.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-commons.u94	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-10	May, Theresa Mary	Support for Meir station reopening	2019-07-10 00:00:00	2019-07-10 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons	Last week I exposed the fact that the number of homeless women going to prison has almost doubled in the past four years. What is especially shocking is that almost half of all women now going to prison are homeless. This is an appalling indictment of our broken justice system. Prison is all too often the very worst place for people who desperately need help to tackle the underlying problems of homelessness, poverty, mental ill health and substance addiction that led to them being jailed in the first place. Is the Minister concerned that our prison system is targeting the poor, the marginalised and the vulnerable?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons.u126	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Burgon, Richard	Homeless women's imprisonment surge	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-commons	We will keep all these matters under review and see how they are working. The hon. Member is right to say that bereavement is an incredibly difficult issue. We want to ensure a safety net, a bare minimum—employers should not see this as the benchmark; it is the bare minimum they should offer. Any reasonable employer should seek always to do what is best and to value their employees as human beings at every level in terms of pay and benefits The hon. Lady asked about extending these provisions in the upcoming employment Bill to cover the loss of a parent. As I say, the Government have been clear that this is a statutory minimum, but we hope it will trigger improvements in workplace support for all kinds of bereavement. I would encourage all employers to engage with the ACAS guidance that supports employers in these circumstances The hon. Lady asked about a systematic approach to ensuring parents are informed of their new rights, including by briefing NHS staff. I agree that it is important that any benefits are clearly signposted. The last thing parents will be thinking about at such a time will be their rights and responsibilities, so the easier it is to do the right thing the better. We have worked closely with stakeholders to make them aware of the new entitlement, including Sands, the charity, which already works closely with hospitals to provide support to parents following a stillbirth or neonatal death, and we will publish guidance on the new entitlement once the legislation is passed I pay tribute to the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Patricia Gibson) for bringing her personal experience to bear and for seeking changes. I congratulate her on getting her amendment through to extend the provisions to include stillbirth. I hope she can take comfort from knowing that her experience has brought about real change to the lives of grieving parents and to our ability to address these matters further in years to come. She asked about extending the provisions to children over the age of 18. Clearly, bereavement is the same no matter the age—losing a child at any age is devastating—and the question of where to draw the line for the purposes of the parental bereavement leave and pay policy has been a difficult consideration. We have consulted with stakeholders representing bereaved parents and employers, and they recognised that the measure needed to be deliverable and affordable. It was accepted that 18 was the most natural threshold for the new entitlement. Moreover, grief affects all family members, not just parents, and so with ACAS and Cruse we will continue to explore the best way to encourage employers to act sympathetically to requests for leave in relation to any bereavement The Government are committed to supporting working parents, and to making this country the best place in the world in which to work and grow a business. These statutory instruments will ensure that bereaved parents have a minimum statutory provision on which to rely if they ever have to go through the unimaginable tragedy of losing a child or baby, and I hope that the House will approve them Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That the draft Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay (General) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House on 23 January, be approved Resolved, That the draft Parental Bereavement Leave Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House on 23 January, be approved. —(Paul Scully. )	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-commons.u349	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-03	Scully, Paul Stuart	Bereavement leave policy approval	2020-03-03 00:00:00	2020-03-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-13-lords	My Lords, I support the Bill although I was pro-European for a long time. Following the referendum and all that has happened since, I am now convinced that withdrawal is not only inevitable but in our country’s best interests—and the sooner the better, so that business and the rest of us can adjust our lives and plans to the new situation As my time in Parliament draws near its end, I reflect more on how one’s perspective changes. I had three Minister of State jobs several decades ago, which involved negotiating with the EU. The first was on health and safety and all that. The next was on regional matters from Northern Ireland. Then, when I was Paymaster-General, I had detailed responsibility for, among other things, negotiating the annual EU budget, including a spell as president of the EU budget council. I came to appreciate the expertise of the UK representative and the importance of the Committee of Permanent Representatives, as well as similar things Throughout that time, some in Europe worked continually towards a united states of Europe in various ways, which we were always against. During my time as a Minister, there were 12 member states but it turned out that widening, which we often discussed, did not rule out deepening, as we hoped at one point. The EU is all about such negotiations happening every day. It is important to realise that the various councils are representative of diverse nations. Some are large like us, but Luxembourg, for example, is smaller than Leeds, as we heard today in a couple of good speeches The EU is not a team with a leader as our Cabinet is at least supposed to be and has been, at least for most of the time in history. It is therefore inclined to make continual, complex compromises reflecting national stresses and strains and special interests. Those compromises then become fixed in stone. Of course, at any given time, several member states have elections pending, reshuffles looming and so on, which affects all these negotiations. Everyone round those tables must be able to go home and say how hard they pressed their national case. That is why the last-minute culture is so strong in these areas. It is also why it is right to fix the deadline in law, as the Bill does, because it focuses minds Of course, the coming negotiations will be hard pounding, with many simultaneous strands. Ministers and officials will need 20:20 vision and to be dedicated, disciplined and decisive. Fortunately, the political background here now makes that possible. Our negotiating team can expect to take no holidays this year. I should imagine that August will be a time of working flat out under maximum pressure, while no doubt compromises and interim arrangements will be agreed. But let them get on with the process On the detailed provisions of the Bill, I commend the excellent speech of my noble friend Lord Bridges of Headley, with whom I agree entirely. For that matter, I also commend the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Butler of Brockwell, which was full of common sense from his long experience in government.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-13-lords.u96	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-13	Cope, John	Support for Brexit Bill	2020-01-13 00:00:00	2020-01-13 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to draw the House’s attention to that important matter. As I said earlier, we have a vital responsibility to ensure that people are able to engage in the political process. He will be pleased to know that Cabinet Office questions will be on Wednesday 5 June as they are the ideal opportunity for him to raise the matter directly with Ministers. I am sure that he will continue to champion the cause of all those who want to participate in our democratic process.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u221	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Spencer, Mark Steven	Engage in political process	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-commons	I am delighted that the right hon. Gentleman is still fighting on the manifesto he submitted to the attention of the British people at the last election. It was pretty clear what they thought of it and of the credibility of the promises he made. It was also clear what they thought of what we were going to do. They see that we are the party of the NHS and that it is this Government who invest in hospitals, in schools, in policing and in bringing down crime. That is because the Government’s careful stewardship of the economy has led to record employment and record low unemployment, which is what delivers the tax revenues that enable us to pay for it all. Whenever Labour are in office, they wreck the economy, make unemployment higher and make us less able to pay for great public services. We are taking the country forwards; they would take it backwards.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-commons.u71	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-15	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Criticizing opponent's economic policies	2020-01-15 00:00:00	2020-01-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons	I have used this unprecedented situation to continue to modernise and improve our support to veterans in the UK. Last week, I launch the first stage in placing veterans’ care in the palm of the hand of every veteran in the country, with the launch of the smartphone application of Veterans UK. I have also secured £6 million of funding from the Treasury for service charities at this time.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons.u132	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Mercer, John Luther	Modernising UK veterans' support	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons	I obviously agree that our fishing industry is incredibly important. The best way we can help it is to get the markets moving again. I understand that there is a particular issue with disruption to markets in the European Union, which is contributing to the situation. Officials had meetings yesterday with fishing representatives, and I am looking for some feedback from that to agree what we do next.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons.u72	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-19	Eustice, Charles George	Boosting fishing market post-Brexit	2020-03-19 00:00:00	2020-03-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-lords	It does not refer to the transitional period as proposed in the withdrawal agreement: it refers to a transitional period that will apply for the purposes of this particular instrument in order to ensure that there is no immediate cut-off for EU lawyers in the United Kingdom. It is for that particular purpose that this particular regulation allows that, and it is considered that that is allowable under the GATS regime as well—in other words, we are allowed a period of time to transition to a point where European lawyers registered in the United Kingdom come to find themselves in the same position as third-party country lawyers.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-lords.u186	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-15	Keen, Richard	Transitional period for EU lawyers	2019-01-15 00:00:00	2019-01-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons	There are three things that we hope will embed the priority. First, this is a whole of Government approach. The Prime Minister announced at Osaka that we would be the first major international development agency to be fully Paris-compliant. Secondly, we have now announced from this Dispatch Box and inserted into our planning that we will double our spend on climate and the environment. The third thing is to ensure that we have the experts on the ground. In Kenya, for example, the focus is on environmental experts, and in Ethiopia it is on forestry experts. It will be funding, Government strategy and staffing that will make the difference.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons.u16	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-17	Stewart, Roderick James Nugent	Climate strategy funding and staffing	2019-07-17 00:00:00	2019-07-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-commons	Yes, I agree. I think Scottish Ministers need to wake up to the fact that we have left the European Union and we will leave the transition period on 31 December. I know that the Scottish Government do not like the outcomes of referendums when they do not go their way, but this is another one we are delivering on.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-commons.u30	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-01	Jack, Alister William	Respect Brexit's democratic outcome	2020-07-01 00:00:00	2020-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is always sunny on the south coast May I ask the Minister to consider the fact that, when people retire, they tend to move to coastal communities, which impacts on our social care and council tax bills? Will he consider long-term funding that properly looks at the age range in coastal communities? And will he also look at the radical reform of social care to make sure we have social care insurance, which would bring more money into the system?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u59	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Merriman, Huw William	Coastal communities social care funding	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons	I very much agree with the right hon. Gentleman that this situation does raise the gravest imaginable concerns. Executing 37 people is a deeply backwards step, which we deplore. In response to the specific question about representations that have been made in the past, I can confirm that British embassy representatives in Riyadh did make representations regarding specific individuals last November The right hon. Gentleman is right to point out that one of the grave concerns about these executions is that they would appear to include minors, or those who were minors at the time that the charges were made. This is of course totally unacceptable and we deplore it. I can advise the House that in just the last few minutes, the European Union—and we have put our name fully to this—has issued a very strong statement of condemnation through the European External Action Service, pointing out that these executions are a regressive step and specifically raising concerns that some of the 37 people executed were minors I fully appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman is saying regarding our arms exports. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia faces a number of threats; the issue of arms is not just about using arms in Yemen. We ensure that any arms exports fully comply with the consolidated criteria that govern any such sales.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons.u150	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-24	Duncan, Alan James Carter	Condemnation of Saudi executions	2019-04-24 00:00:00	2019-04-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons	This is something that we are keeping a close eye on. We are seeing a disproportionate impact on ethnic minorities, as I mentioned before, but NHS England is the right body to make the decisions on how each and every care organisation should look after its staff. We are not calling for ethnic minority medical staff to be taken off the frontline, as that would disproportionately impact ethnic minority communities, but we are doing everything that we can to ensure that they are protected. With regard to PPE, this is something, as I said earlier, that we have been working round the clock to deliver. We have had more than 1 billion items of PPE delivered to health organisations across the country, and we will continue to ensure that our frontline staff are very well protected.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons.u41	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-06	Badenoch, Olukemi Olufunto	Ensuring protection for ethnic minorities	2020-05-06 00:00:00	2020-05-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-26-lords	My Lords, I am pleased to contribute to this Second Reading debate, and—as it is my first opportunity to do so—I welcome the Minister to his new role. I look forward to working with him This Bill sets out the current long-term funding settlement for the NHS, as set out in the Long Term Plan published last year. While I welcome the fact that the Government have provided a long-term funding settlement to provide some of the certainty we have heard about, the key question is not whether legislation is needed—frankly, it is not necessary for the Government to commit themselves in primary legislation to something that is already well within their powers—but whether the funding allocation for NHS England increasing to £148.5 billion by 2024 is sufficient to meet a decade of NHS underfunding, to respond to an ageing population and to meet the plan’s commitments to raise standards in healthcare As alluded to by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, and like many external commentators, I note that the King’s Fund, Nuffield Trust and Health Foundation have all said that an increase of at least 4% is required to modernise the NHS and improve standards. In big picture terms, the overriding concern about this Bill is that it does not apply to the whole healthcare budget. As has already been said, NHS England does not operate in isolation, and to improve the health of the population, it is essential that new funding is accompanied by equivalent and sustainable investment in public health, social care and capital funding. Failure to invest now will simply increase the strain on the NHS and store up problems for the future I will focus the rest of my remarks on mental health funding, which the Minister focused on in his introductory speech. It was a positive step forward that the long-term plan placed a considerably stronger focus on mental health services, with a commitment that funding for mental health services would grow at a faster rate than the overall NHS budget, increasing by at least £2.3 billion per year by 2024. That is an important figure, which I will come back to. For far too long, people with mental health problems have had to put up with second class services, with too many people struggling to access treatment and support. Decades of underfunding and neglect mean that services are too often delivered in sub-standard and sometimes dangerous facilities and buildings, and there are significant shortages in the mental health workforce With that as the overall context, I of course welcome the commitment that funding for mental health services will grow faster than the overall NHS budget and that funding for children’s services will increase faster than total mental health spending per se. However, we must not underestimate the challenge of ensuring that money earmarked for mental health services reaches the front line. This is the crux of the matter that I want to talk about. Although the additional funding for mental health is ring-fenced in the long-term plan, it is unclear how this will work in practice. We need much greater clarity from the Government about how they plan to guarantee that this money is spent on front-line mental health services. Frankly, it is impossible to gauge this from the data currently available. I will say a few more words about this During the Commons stages of the Bill, a cross-party group of MPs supported amendments to require the Secretary of State to report to Parliament every year on whether the money received by mental health services was taking us closer to achieving parity of esteem. These amendments were not accepted by the Government—sadly, from my perspective—and, as this is a money Bill, we are of course unable to table any amendments here I was particularly enthusiastic about the amendment tabled by my honourable friend Munira Wilson MP, which would have required the Secretary of State to lay before Parliament an annual report on spending on child and adolescent mental health services. In my view, this would have done a lot to strengthen much-needed transparency and accountability in this area. However, to try to remain positive, I noted in Hansard that the Minister replying, Edward Argar, expressed some sympathy with the sentiment behind the amendment and agreed to meet Munira Wilson and other colleagues to discuss further what could be done to improve the reporting on children’s mental health services. I look forward to hearing the outcome of that meeting and hope that the Minister in this House will make a commitment that he will report back to noble Lords on what happens in those discussions I want to explain briefly why I think that the CAMHS expenditure is so important. When you analyse it at a national level, it all looks pretty okay; it looks like it is going in the right direction. But this masks continued and really worrying inconsistencies in reporting by CCGs, which prevent parliamentarians and researchers being confident in the figures published at local level. For example, 34 CCGs reported spending less on services for children and young people combined, including on eating disorders services, in 2018-19 compared to the previous years, with nine of those areas having reported spending cuts of at least 27%. This is hardly in line with the public commitment to spend more in this area. I also find it baffling that CCGs which are reporting spending cuts in the dashboard are simultaneously getting a tick to say that they have met the mental health investment standard. I am really perplexed by how this is happening and, if the Minister can shed any light on this, I shall be really grateful Something that I have been calling for for some time now is a separate children and young people’s mental health investment standard with a dashboard, so that we can get a more detailed breakdown on the way money is being spent on services for children’s mental health, ranging from preventive to crisis care. In the same way that the mental health dashboard reports on whether each CCG has met the mental health investment standard, it should also report separately on whether each CCG has increased the proportion it is spending on children and young people’s mental health. In addition, if any CCG fails to increase the amount it spends, I really feel that it should provide a public explanation of the reason. Speaking personally, I would also like to see sanctions applied to CCGs which do not provide a satisfactory explanation There are a couple of other areas which I would like to cover briefly. One is the workforce. Mental health has one of the most serious workforce shortages in any part of the NHS, and securing and retaining the right workforce is probably the biggest barrier to delivering the Government’s commitments to improve mental health care. We know at the moment that, to meet the promises already made for mental health and to reduce vacancies and cover requirements, we need about 4,500 additional consultant psychiatrists for 2029 Where are these people going to come from? The recent census by the Royal College of Psychiatrists showed that the rate of unfilled NHS consultant psychiatrist posts had doubled in the last six years and that one in 10 posts is vacant. Despite the shortage of doctors, our medical schools operate under a strict admissions cap, often turning away highly qualified and ambitious students. We need to double the number of medical school places by 2029 to train enough consultants to fill the roles already promised. I would like to see places allocated in particular to schools that have a plan in place to encourage students to choose psychiatry Substantial investment in expanding the workforce is urgently required and I eagerly await the publication of the NHS People Plan, which, I hope, will set out how the Government plan to address these shortages. It is vital that the Government use the opportunity of the forthcoming Budget to commit to additional investment to support the recruitment and training of mental health staff Finally, on capital funding—this has already been alluded to—the review of the Mental Health Act found that mental health facilities where patients are admitted are often the most out of date in the NHS estate. At times, they have more in common with prisons than hospitals. There are badly designed, dilapidated buildings with poor facilities, which all contribute to a sense of containment and make it difficult for patients to be effectively engaged in therapeutic activities. I was particularly taken with what the review said about how inappropriate it was that we still use dormitory provision in mental health wards for people who have been sectioned under the Mental Health Act. It just does not seem right at all The Minister alluded to the fact that the Government have taken some steps to address capital funding issues, including announcing plans to build 40 new hospitals through the health infrastructure plan. However, so far, mental health has been almost totally overlooked in these discussions, despite the review’s findings. Therefore, I again call on the Government to use the 2020 Budget to set out a major, multiyear capital investment programme to modernise the mental health estate and bring it into the 21st century To recap, the Government must do more to ensure that the additional funding in the Bill leads to sustained investment in mental health in every local area in England, to address the shortages in the workforce and to commit to much-needed capital investment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-26-lords.u57	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-26	Tyler, Claire	Insufficient NHS funding concerns raised	2020-02-26 00:00:00	2020-02-26 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons	It is wonderful that the strategy has emerged, but will my hon. Friend be just as clear about legislative change associated with that strategy? I understand that a further Bill may come forward; given the urgency of this issue and the concentration that his Department is applying to the strategy, when can we expect that legislation?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons.u433	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-30	Hayes, John Henry	Request for legislative clarity and timing	2020-11-30 00:00:00	2020-11-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-lords	My Lords, I have only one brief question, which is to do with the transparency SI. I accept that we should approve both the SIs before us, but I regret that there has been no consultation on either instrument. As I remarked earlier, the engagement noted in both EMs is not a satisfactory substitute. However, I was happy to hear the Minister’s response to my suggestion of a more informative account of engagement becoming part of future EMs Reading the EM and the impact assessment for the transparency SI highlights one issue: the usual question of reciprocity. The EM for the transparency SI makes it clear that the Treasury can decide which third-country entities can access data on SFTs held in UK trade repositories. I assume that this provision means that all EEA entities currently with access will be allowed continued access. But what about the other way round? As things stand, if we crash out of the EU with no deal, will the UK still have access to data held in the three EEA trade repositories? If not, would it have significant implications for our financial services industry? Have the Government made any estimate of what the consequences of non-reciprocity might be? What assurance have the Government had from the EU, if any, that the UK would be allowed continued access after 29 March?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-lords.u121	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Sharkey, John Kevin	Concern over financial data reciprocity	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-commons	The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows full well that the Government have launched an urgent investigation into inequalities across the whole of society. We will certainly address them in a thoroughgoing way. I am amazed that he seems ignorant of that fact, absolutely amazed. It is a quite extraordinary state of affairs. The right hon. and learned Gentleman’s general line of questioning is that one moment he is supporting the restrictions, the next moment he seems to be opposing them. One day the Opposition are theoretically marching side by side with the rest of us trying to defeat coronavirus, the next minute they are off in the undergrowth firing from the sidelines. I must repeat it: it was the hon. Member for Stretford and Urmston (Kate Green), the shadow Education Secretary, who really revealed what Labour is all about. She said that this was a “good crisis” that they intended to exploit. We see this as a moment for the nation to come together, and that is what we are doing. We are taking the tough decisions that will take this country forward: not just the lifetime skills guarantee, which the right hon. and learned Gentleman was kind enough to mention, but the huge investments we are making in the NHS, in our policing, in affordable housing. This is the Government and this is the party who are taking the tough decisions to take this country forward, while, I am afraid, once again all they want to do is snipe from the sidelines.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-commons.u87	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-30	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Government addressing societal inequalities	2020-09-30 00:00:00	2020-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-12-commons	There is still a lot more to do on levelling the gender pay gap, and I am delighted to announce today the next round of grants to support women who face significant barriers when returning to work. The Adviza Partnership, the Regular Forces Employment Association, which is the forces employment charity, Mpower People, Westminster City Council, the Shpresa Programme, Beam, and Liverpool City Council are some of the awardees, and they will create opportunities for the most disadvantaged women in our society to achieve their full potential.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-12-commons.u78	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-12	Mordaunt, Penelope Mary	Grants for women's workforce support	2019-06-12 00:00:00	2019-06-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons	DFID it is world renowned for its focus and programme expertise, and that will continue to be the case. Poverty reduction will continue to be a critical focus on how we spend the 0.7% that the Government continue to be committed to. We enshrined it in law and it will stay: the Prime Minister is absolutely committed to that. Interestingly, I think there is a real challenge with the sustainable development goals—there are 17 of them—and the ability to help a country become self-sufficient and climb up that ladder will absolutely continue. We will continue to commit to the 0.7% target, based on GNI.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons.u29	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Trevelyan, Anne-Marie Belinda	Commitment to 0.7% GNI aid	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	As ever, my hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this very important issue. Companies must do more to understand their supply-chain risks. Our cyber essentials scheme extends our influence to organisations that provide products and services to Government; it specifies standards that will improve their cyber-security. We use contractual arrangements to ensure that they help those in their supply chains, often small companies, to be more secure.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u51	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Dowden, Oliver James	Improve supply-chain cybersecurity standards	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	At the Conservative party conference, the Prime Minister said he would prevent the whole criminal justice system being hamstrung by what the Home Secretary would doubtlessly like to call lefty human rights lawyers and other do-gooders. On 9 October, the chair of the Bar wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, copied to the Attorney General, asking the Prime Minister to withdraw those comments. Will she at least see that the chair of the Bar gets a reply to that letter sent a month ago? Those comments are leading to attacks—not just verbal, but often physical—on lawyers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u93	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Slaughter, Andrew Francis	Protect lawyers from harmful comments	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I fear that my right hon. Friend may have inadvertently misled the House given the fact that every single Member of this party who has lost the Whip is still a member of the Conservative party unless they have chosen to cross the Floor. Therefore, the situation that he has described is not actually the case. It is important to realise that the discussion that we are having is that we need to be in the place—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons.u662	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-09	Scully, Paul Stuart	Members losing Whip remain Conservative	2019-09-09 00:00:00	2019-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	I agree. That is the fundamental challenge. When we are trying to answer the important question of how we prevent this kind of thing from happening, the most important first step is to properly understand the motives of the people who try to perpetrate these attacks. We do not know that at this stage, but it seems clear that one was a religious motive to try and set faith against faith, and one was a cultural motive to try and target western tourists who are visiting Sri Lanka. We have to be alive to both of those, but the shadow Foreign Secretary was absolutely right in saying that one of the things that we can do to support Sri Lanka is—obviously subject to travel advice, which is very carefully kept under review—to continue to visit a country that depends on tourism to show our support and to show that we are not going to be put off by this kind of terrorism.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u341	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Hunt, Jeremy Richard Streynsham	Understanding attackers' motives crucial	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-05-commons	I welcome the very constructive approach that the hon. Gentleman takes in his local role as well as in this House. Of course, we have put in the extra funding that the NHS needs this winter. We are expanding over 140 emergency departments, because emergency departments need more space so there can be social distancing. We have also put in funding so that we can continue the work on electives, even though it is more difficult, and on infection control—and, of course, as much discussed, on testing. I look forward very much to working with him further as we try to control this virus.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-05-commons.u268	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-05	Hancock, Matthew John David	NHS funding and expansion praised	2020-10-05 00:00:00	2020-10-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-lords	My Lords, we have taken strong action to support working families. We now have the national living wage and so on, but I agree entirely with the noble Lord that it is incredibly important to look closely at low pay and issues around debt. The Government are doing this, and indeed it is something that is close to my heart. Sometimes debt goes to the heart of why people are in poverty. We need to get much closer to this issue and in the coming months we will be introducing a breathing space to help people out of debt. We are also keen to ensure that children learn how to cope with money because that, as well as a low-wage economy, is often at the core of where things go wrong.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-lords.u23	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-21	Buscombe, Peta	Supporting families combating low pay	2019-05-21 00:00:00	2019-05-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons	I strongly endorse what my right hon. Friend is saying. People in my constituency will have listened with incredulity to the Home Secretary talking about extra resources when, yesterday, they were told that Newton-le-Willows police station will close, except for a few hours on a Friday, precisely because there is a lack of resources. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, on this Government’s watch, there are fewer police officers and they are further away from the communities that they seek to serve?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons.u313	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-05	McGinn, Conor Patrick	Government cuts police resources	2019-02-05 00:00:00	2019-02-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords	I am grateful to the noble Baroness for raising the importance of community nursing, and all community-based healthcare, including community diagnostic hubs. The interest in nurse recruitment has risen dramatically—by 138% in recent months—partly because of our massive advertising campaign and the renewed focus of NHS trusts in community nursing, which will be matched by opportunities to provide training for those who step forward for jobs.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords.u40	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-15	Bethell, James	Community nursing importance and recruitment	2020-09-15 00:00:00	2020-09-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons	Yes, and in answer to the amendment that was tabled but not selected, Ministers are obliged to act in accordance with our ECHR obligations. Throughout this process, we have a legal duty under the Human Rights Act 1998 to act compatibly with convention rights, including article 1 of the 13th protocol, which was incorporated in schedule 1 to the Human Rights Acts 1998 through the Human Rights Act (Amendment) Order 2004. Were Ministers to act unlawfully in making subordinate legislation under subsection 5(b) that was incompatible with the convention rights, it would be open to the courts to strike down that legislation by applying ordinary public law principles.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons.u249	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-30	Wallace, Robert Ben Lobban	Ministers must follow ECHR obligations	2019-01-30 00:00:00	2019-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-lords	I have just taken advice and apparently I cannot do that. Please ignore everything I have just said On a day when you have three statutory instruments, an Urgent Question, a Question and a speech to deliver to the LGBT conference, this is what happens. I apologise to noble Lords that I have got the right speeches but in the wrong order. I will sit down for a minute to make sure that I have got the right instrument.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-lords.u122	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-18	Williams, Susan	Apology for speech mix-up	2019-03-18 00:00:00	2019-03-18 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons	I congratulate the hon. Members for West Bromwich East (Nicola Richards) and for Stourbridge (Suzanne Webb) on their maiden speeches. They both spoke warmly of two constituencies that I know very well, as a west midlands girl myself There are a lot of things that I found very surprising on becoming an MP. I do not think I will ever find it normal being called “ma’am” or having doors opened for me. But some of it is unnerving as well. Before I was elected, I did not know that big businesses sent gifts to MPs—gifts that always seemed to be accompanied by requests. The other week, Heathrow sent me a food hamper, along with an ask. It wanted me to support its third runway—as if some shortbread biscuits would drown out the warnings of the climate emergency. Google recently sent me a gift as well. It was not much, but it got me thinking about corporate lobbying. It reminded me that, according to the Tax Justice Network, in 2018 Google avoided £1.5 billion in tax, and in 2016 it reached a deal with the Government, after dozens of meetings with Ministers, to secure an effective tax rate of just 3% on profits estimated to be more than £7 billion Now, I might have missed it, but I do not think that doctors and nurses or factory workers and cleaners in Coventry South were offered private meetings with Ministers to create tailor-made sweetheart packages to reduce their taxes, yet this is a premium service that is given to big business. So it often seems to be a case of one rule for billionaires and big business and another rule for everyone else. I think the whole web of dinners, gifts, receptions and donations has something to do with that, because the super-rich do not spend their money on MPs out of generosity and out of the goodness of their hearts—they want something in return. Let us be honest: this wealth is used to buy influence in this House; to get this place to serve their interests and not the interests of our constituents. Under the Conservatives, it looks to me like their investment is paying off, because by the end of this Parliament the Government are on course to have handed out almost £100 billion in tax breaks and corporate giveaways. Corporate taxation has been slashed to one of the lowest rates in the world. An estimated £90 billion of tax is still being dodged every year Perhaps it is me—perhaps I am being cynical and a bit jaded beyond my years—but when the Minister gets up and says that his Government will tackle tax avoidance, I am sorry, but I am going to find that difficult to believe. I find it difficult because I know that time and time again we have heard Conservative Ministers talk the talk on being tough on tax for the cameras but backslide when those cameras are switched off. That is what happened when the Panama and Paradise papers revealed an industrial scale of tax dodging When the Minister talks tough, I find it difficult to believe him because I know that the super-rich donors who fund his party are also exploiting tax loopholes, and that they expect a return on their investment too. I find it difficult because I know that the billionaire press barons who often act as the propaganda wing of the Conservative party are in on it too. The owner of the Daily Mail has profited from being a non-dom—an exclusive status that lets the ultra-wealthy reside in the UK but pay no tax on offshore income and investments. The owners of The Daily Telegraph are reportedly based in Monaco and the Channel Islands. As for the owner of The Sun—well, his company was found by a 2008 US report to have 152 subsidiaries, including 62 in the British Virgin Islands, 33 in the Caymans, and 15 in Mauritius. I know that these billionaire press barons do not copy and paste Conservative press releases into their papers for nothing. I would be honest with the Chancellor if he was here but he is not, so all I will say is that after spending a career working with hedge funds and associates who avoid tax, I am sure he will understand that I have trust issues with him as well To conclude, the truth is that my constituents cannot trust this Government on tax dodgers. They cannot trust a party that has cut taxes for the super-rich, takes their donations and lets them hoard their wealth and hide it. The British public cannot trust a party that has slashed the services they rely on, only to blame the NHS waiting lists and overcrowded classrooms on migrants. It is not migrants who rob the public purse of billions of pounds. It is not migrants who buy influence and subvert democracy, and it is not migrants who let hospitals crumble and schools fall into ruin. It is the tax dodgers and the billionaire press barons, and it is the Tory Government, who serve the interests of the 1%, not the British people.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons.u200	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-25	Sultana, Zarah	Condemns corporate influence and tax avoidance	2020-02-25 00:00:00	2020-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-commons	That is a good question. Obviously, we operate in an overall policy framework called the consolidated criteria. Each individual licence application is in itself a separate decision, based on those consolidated criteria. We follow those criteria. Those decisions can be made on a daily basis—for each individual export licence that comes in—by Ministers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-commons.u174	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-13	Hands, Gregory William	Decisions based on consolidated criteria	2020-07-13 00:00:00	2020-07-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons	As a birthday present next week, I am looking forward to voting down this terrible deal, which will lead the country into a much worse position than it is in currently. Will the Minister confirm that it is not the case that, by default, this country will then drop out under a no-deal situation? It is in the gift of the Government to use their powers to withdraw article 50. Will he confirm that it will be at the Government’s discretion to allow a no-deal Brexit to happen?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons.u277	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Sweeney, Paul John	Opposing deal, questioning no-deal discretion	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	The hon. Gentleman is making an important point about both GCHQ and the tech giants. Does he agree that to be more able and to be seen to eliminate racial discrimination from platforms and technology, the tech giants and others, including GCHQ, should better represent the diversity of the country in which they are rooted?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u497	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Onwurah, Chinyelu Susan	Increase tech diversity representation	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-04-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We need to use NATO, and it will require reform to adapt to meet new threats. The way to do that is to strengthen and reinforce NATO, so that it can deal with state actors, including Russia, cyber, and all the modern threats. We are absolutely committed to doing that, and bringing our European and north American allies together.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-04-commons.u8	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-04	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Reform and strengthen NATO	2020-02-04 00:00:00	2020-02-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons	I welcome this announcement and echo the words of support that the Secretary of State has expressed for Grenfell United, the UK Cladding Action Group and others who have campaigned on this issue. Will he clarify one point in relation to his statement? He said that the funding would be conditional on the building owner “agreeing a contract to start remediation works within a set period. ” Can he say what that set period will be? Can he also tell us what will happen if they do not do it within that set period? Would he perhaps be willing to name and shame those who are unwilling to take their responsibilities seriously?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons.u308	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-09	Brake, Thomas Anthony	Cladding remediation timeframe clarification sought	2019-05-09 00:00:00	2019-05-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-commons	Although it is positive to see the return of fans to grassroots and non-league football, the ongoing battle against the coronavirus has meant that a return to live audiences for elite sport has regrettably not been possible. So although I was fortunate enough to join Radcliffe for their first home game of the season—the results were not to my liking—we do need to think about the wider sport. Can my hon. Friend confirm that he will continue to work with the sector to get families back as soon as it is safe to support not only our clubs, but our communities?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-commons.u164	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-30	Wakeford, Christian	Return fans to elite sport	2020-09-30 00:00:00	2020-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-lords	My Lords, once again, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Collins, for his support. He and I are talking about the issues impacting British nationals globally, and I am very grateful for his support in this matter. He asked a number of pertinent questions on the concerns that exist. I, too, listened to the debate on the Statement in the other place, and, rightly, genuine concerns have been raised. I am sure that I speak for many in your Lordships’ House today, as well as others Noble Lords have been contacting me on an almost hourly basis with genuine concerns that have been raised with them. I assure the House that my colleagues and I are dealing directly with, and taking up, those issues. Only this morning, I was dealing with a consular case that had arisen. We are seeking to speak directly to the Members of Parliament concerned to ensure that we address those issues head on. As the noble Lord will be aware, my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary will be leading a virtual call with G7 Foreign Ministers tomorrow and this is the item on the agenda. We are not alone in this matter—all countries across the world are impacted. However, the noble Lord is right to raise the need for clarity and information. We are seeking to improve that, as improvements can always be made He talked about doubling capacity and asked whether demand was being met. The fact that we are having to double capacity means that current demand is not being met. To be candid, there will be challenges ahead. I am the Minister for south Asia, where, thankfully, the number of cases thus far has been minimal. However, we are challenged by the fact that there are thousands and thousands of British nationals abroad, and we need to react to that positively and proactively. A major part of the Foreign Office effort is that, barring certain priorities that need to be sustained, Ministers and officials are now fully focused on this crisis The noble Lord’s point on data collection is well made. We are continuing to collect data on nationals abroad. He made a very constructive suggestion about NHS workers abroad, and I will certainly take that back to see how we can best factor it in.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-lords.u65	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Ahmad, Tariq	Addressing concerns of British nationals	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-04-commons	These sets of regulations were made by the Secretary of State on 26 March and 21 April respectively. Following the return of the House after the Easter recess, they are rightly being brought before the House today for the scrutiny and debate that they require. They are exceptional measures, brought forward to reflect exceptional challenges and times, but although it is right that these regulations—necessary to meet the public health needs of the coronavirus pandemic—are brought forward, it is also right that we ensure that this House is able to play its proper role, and that due process and the rule of law are maintained. With that in mind, I thank the shadow Minister and the Opposition parties for facilitating this debate taking place today The country has been, and still is, engaged in a national effort to beat coronavirus covid-19. Delivering a strategy designed to ensure that our NHS is protected, with capacity at all times exceeding the demand for intensive care beds for coronavirus patients, flattening the peak, and driving down the rate of transmission of disease and the number of infections, alongside the work to significantly expand NHS capacity, have all helped to protect our NHS and to save lives. Sadly, although this has been working, there have been many who have died from this disease—each and every one of them a tragedy, and each and every one a real person. Our thoughts are with all their friends and families at this time. I also put on record all of our continued thanks and appreciation to NHS and care workers, and to key workers around the country, for the phenomenal work that they are doing caring for people and keeping the United Kingdom going The regulations we debate today have played a crucial role in the success we are seeing in reducing infection transmission levels. They impose significant demands upon individuals and society as a whole, with impacts on business, the economy and daily life, and I do understand the sacrifices people are making at this time, their frustrations, and, indeed, their anxieties. But these regulations are necessary, because the single most important step we can all take to beating this disease is to stay at home in order to reduce the spread and to protect ourselves and others. That is why, in these regulations, the Government introduce three main social distancing measures: requiring people to stay at home as far as possible, with only very limited exceptions; closing certain businesses and venues; and stopping gatherings of more than two people in public. These regulations are similar to those introduced by other countries. We have worked closely with the devolved Administrations, to whom I should also pay tribute, in developing and reviewing these measures The main statutory instrument, No. 350, requires enforcement of the closure of some businesses and restrictions on others from 12 pm on 26 March 2020. As set out in the notes, the regulations require the closure of drinking establishments, including bars, pubs and nightclubs, and food and drink venues with consumption on-site, excluding hospitals, schools, care homes, homeless services and prison canteens, as well as other exemptions. Regulation 4(4) requires the closure of entertainment venues including cinemas, theatres, concert halls, bingo halls, museums, galleries, spas, hairdressing and massage parlours, casinos, funfairs, libraries, community centres, and non-food outdoor markets. Regulation 5(1) requires businesses offering goods for sale or for hire, or providing library services, to cease to do so except in response to orders received online, by telephone or by mail order. Types of businesses specified in part 3 of schedule 2 are exempt from these restrictions. Regulation 5(2) excludes hot and cold food collection and delivery from the closure restrictions. Regulations 5(3) and 5(4) require hotels and similar establishments to remain open for permanent residence only to persons in a hotel because they are moving home, attending a funeral, or unable to return home The second set of regulations, No. 447, makes a small number of consequential amendments to improve the operational implementation of the main regulations These regulations are made under section 45C of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984, with Her Majesty’s Government clear that the powers under that Act are sufficient to introduce them Given the impact that these regulations have on individuals and businesses, notwithstanding the huge support package announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I know that a number of issues relating to these regulations have been raised in recent days by members of the public and, indeed, by hon. Members, and I will touch on those now. However, I will endeavour to respond more fully to specific points raised by Members when I wind up the debate First, there is the question of enforcement. The Joint Committee on Human Rights and others have expressed concerns about variations in enforcement and in the approach adopted to it by different police forces. As hon. Members will be aware, guidance was issued to police forces, and this has continued to be updated and clarified. It is important that the police operate within the law, which is the law as it is set out in these regulations, and that guidance is treated as just that—clarifying guidance The British people have been amazing in their collective response to the restrictions, and compliance has been very high. However, a very small minority have not always complied. The police have been doing their very challenging job at this time with dedication and, by and large, pragmatism. The approach of “engage, explain, encourage, and only then enforce where it is absolutely necessary” is the right one. The small number of examples, while important, of what can seem like over-enthusiastic enforcement should not detract from the fantastic work being done by the police across the country The final aspect of the regulations that I draw attention to is the requirement that they be reviewed every 21 days, to ensure that they remain necessary and appropriate. The first review took place on 16 April, with the First Secretary of State confirming that they would remain in place. The next review is due on 7 May. I am aware of the desire of Members and across the country for more detail on the UK’s progress and future steps, which I understand. The review on 7 May will consider the necessity of the regulations against the public health aim, including the five considerations set out by my right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State: first, that the NHS can provide critical care across the UK; secondly, that there is a sustained and consistent fall in the daily death rate; thirdly, that infection rates decrease to an acceptable level; fourthly, that supplies of personal protective equipment and testing meet future demand; and fifthly, that evidence is clear that any changes will not risk a second peak of the virus The Prime Minister has set out that further announcements on this will be made soon. As he said on Thursday last week, the Government will set out a comprehensive plan this week, which will explain how we will get our economy moving while continuing to suppress the disease. It will set out how we will seek to get life back to normal for as many people as we can, as quickly, equitably and fairly as we can, while continuing to protect the NHS. And it will, of course, as throughout, continue to be guided by the best scientific and medical advice. I hope the House will understand that I do not intend to pre-empt what the Prime Minister might say later this week on the basis of that advice It is right that we made these regulations as and when we did to help tackle the coronavirus/covid-19 pandemic. Her Majesty’s Government consider these regulations to be proportionate and appropriate in the face of this pandemic, but it is absolutely right that this House properly scrutinises and debates them and their impact upon our country, and I look forward to hearing Members’ contributions. I commend these regulations to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-04-commons.u214	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-04	Argar, Edward John Comport	Coronavirus regulations impact and enforcement	2020-05-04 00:00:00	2020-05-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-30-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. He is correct. In Glasgow, where there are many high-rise flats, that policy has worked well, but as I will come on to say, we need a bit of flexibility. I firmly believe—I think he would share this view—that the events that night at Grenfell were exceptional. They were not normal; they were an extreme. It was a very difficult fire for any responding firefighters or senior officer to manage well. While rules, procedures and practices are needed for health and safety, they require to be applied in such a manner that we do not stifle freedom of thought. One of the greatest assets in my early days as a firefighter was the use of initiative and improvisation. To some extent, that has been curtailed over time by the fear of disciplinary action, of being sued in an increasingly litigious society, or of departing from the perceived norm or any policy of long standing. Policies are often quite rigid and lack the flexibility that takes account of the inexact science of firefighting and the unpredictability of both fire and human behaviour The greatest question of all is: who was informed, and what revised fire risk assessment took place when the whole dynamic and risks presented at Grenfell changed? A high-rise building was draped in flammable cladding and became an inferno, costing the lives of 72 individuals. Their deaths must not be in vain. I would just comment that, as we speak today in this Chamber, there are still flaws in the building regulations in Scotland. We can still apply flammable cladding. I hope that the Scottish Government will put that right; I am sure that they will My sympathies go to the families of those who lost their lives in the Grenfell tragedy, but my sympathies also go to the families of the frontline firefighters, who have to deal with their loved one’s experiences on that dreadful night of 14 June 2017, together with external pressures from very intense public scrutiny. Grenfell must be a catalyst for change and secure improvements for fire safety and firefighting not only for the London fire brigade, but for the whole of the UK. Finally, I thank Sir Martin and those who gave evidence and shared their experience of that dreadful night, which will haunt many for years to come.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-30-commons.u243	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-30	Grant, William	Grenfell tragedy necessitates fire safety improvements	2019-10-30 00:00:00	2019-10-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-lords	My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat, in the form of a Statement, the Answer given yesterday in another place to an Urgent Question which asked my honourable friend the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to make a statement on the suspension of the national minimum wage naming scheme. The Statement is as follows: “Enforcement of the national minimum wage and the national living wage is a priority for the Government, and we take tough action against the minority of employers who underpay. Last year, employers were ordered to repay over 220,000 UK workers a record £24.4 million of arrears. We have more than doubled the budget for minimum wage compliance and enforcement since 2015, and it is now at a record high of £27.4 million As part of our enforcement approach, we name employers who have breached the legislation, which raises awareness of national minimum wage enforcement and deters others who may be tempted to break the law. To date, the Government have named almost 2,000 employers who have underpaid the national minimum wage. The Government are reviewing the naming scheme to ensure that it continues effectively to support minimum wage compliance. This is in response to a recommendation made by the director of labour market enforcement, Professor Sir David Metcalf, last year In December 2018 we accepted both of the director’s recommendations relating to the naming scheme, specifically to review the scheme’s effectiveness and to consider how to provide further information under the scheme in future. The Government have sought to learn from other naming schemes and other regulatory approaches. We have also discussed the evidence with the director of labour market enforcement and have conducted further analysis to understand the impact that any changes to the scheme would have on the number of employers named Naming and shaming remains an important part of our enforcement toolkit, and the review will be concluded in the coming weeks. Any changes to the scheme will be communicated through the national minimum wage enforcement policy documents” That concludes the Statement.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-lords.u113	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-05	Eden, Oliver Michael Robert	Minimum wage enforcement scheme review	2019-06-05 00:00:00	2019-06-05 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments and for his thoughtful remarks about Reading as a community. I met the hon. Member for Reading East (Matt Rodda) and made exactly the same point. We must be united and work at a community and multi-faith level with all organisations. That is really important, both now and going forward, to ensure that people are remembered in the right and appropriate way, and that we support the community at this difficult time, which we all do The hon. Gentleman asked some important questions. He is absolutely right that legislation is never the only solution, not just on issues of this nature but on wider safeguarding, community measures and the responses that are put in place. That brings me on to community responders, police officers, backing our police and resourcing those who keep our communities and the people in our country safe. I met the chief constable of Thames Valley police, John Campbell, this morning. Again, that is a conversation I had. I was in touch with him over the weekend and had the assurance that they are well supported in terms of the resources they need. They are dealing with a live investigation. Obviously, the investigation is now a counter-terrorism investigation, but even so they have given me that assurance There are a number of other points to make when it comes to violence of every nature, including serious violence. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the serious violence taskforce. We now have the National Policing Board, which has effectively taken over that remit. The National Policing Board has already met several times, including in recent weeks, to discuss not just policing but crime and the Government’s overall crime strategy from a holistic perspective. That also covers the Ministry of Justice side, the end-to-end aspect of the criminal justice system and how offenders are treated The hon. Gentleman spoke about the work that is required on deradicalisation in prisons. The work that needs to take place builds on Prevent and on safeguards that exist already, but these are evolving issues in terms of the type of skills and resources that are needed, as well as the types of deradicalisation techniques and Prevent work that have to be invested in. That is continuous. There is never one solution for how to deradicalise individuals. A range of tools, techniques and programmes are in place. It is right that we continue to review and work with that. As the hon. Gentleman will know, a great deal of work has taken place around the review of Prevent The hon. Gentleman’s final point related to the Intelligence and Security Committee. Appointments to the Committee are taking place and an announcement will be made in due course on when that will be coming forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u143	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Patel, Priti Sushil	Community support, police resourcing, deradicalisation	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-commons	The Minister makes an important point about the need for proper integration and co-ordination of the charities supporting our veterans. I join in his remarks about Reserves Day. Having served in the reserves for 12 years, I think it is important to acknowledge the sacrifices made by reservists. Thousands of them have served on operations overseas. We should recognise the impact that may have had on their personal life, and they should not be forgotten when it comes to supporting veterans.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-commons.u321	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-26	Sweeney, Paul John	Support for veterans and reservists	2019-06-26 00:00:00	2019-06-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	In business questions today, the Leader of the House brushed off my suggestion for a specific debate where the Government could present their evidence that the closures in and restrictions on the hospitality, sport and leisure industries would have a significant impact on the course of the pandemic. I was trying to be helpful. Two weeks ago, the Prime Minister was asked: “is there a scientific basis for the 10 pm rule? ...If there is a basis, why do the Government not do themselves a favour and publish it? ” —[Official Report, 7 October 2020; Vol. 681, c. 897. ] The industry would not necessarily have been happy with that, but it would at least have been comprehensible. Indeed, had it been published earlier, things may have been even better because those in the industry would not have had to spend considerable sums on changing their premises, only to have that disregarded. They may have the slightest suspicion that the evidence is non-existent or at best very thin, and that the policy has been driven more by the desire to be seen to be doing something, but at huge cost to this industry, which is not only a huge part of the economy, but part of what makes our country stand out in the world. What a vast industry we are talking about: pubs and clubs; restaurants and cafés; betting shops; bingo halls and casinos; cinemas and theatres; gyms; music venues; wedding venues; football and rugby clubs and racecourses—the list goes on—as well as the myriad suppliers and transport companies that service them. There are hundreds of thousands of businesses, some international brands, but most small businesses whose owners have invested their life’s work, dreams and savings in them. They have been hanging on, hoping for better times. The Government’s response is depriving them of that hope. Of course they need relief and the belated help that was announced today, but they also need customers and trade That is another reason why the Chancellor’s contribution today was disappointing. There seemed to be no recognition of the Government as a customer—a major purchaser of goods and services. The Government could have a big impact on employment and economic revival. There was no indication of any sense of urgency in Whitehall for that As an example, the order for fleet solid support ships has been hanging around with the Ministry of Defence for years, and they are needed. This week, the Defence Secretary announced that the MOD will be inviting bids for a British-based contract, but it will not issue the invitation until the spring. Why further dither and delay? Get a move on. Get industry gearing up. The same goes for buses, trains, cars, trucks, hospitals, schools, road and rail fares—the list is endless. What that means in the end is jobs, jobs, jobs. Earlier in the year, the Prime Minister claimed to be channelling his inner Franklin Roosevelt. Well, let him take a lesson from the Works Progress Administration in the US and get real projects—the output but also the work—rolling fast The Secretary of State talked about suppressing the virus until we get a vaccine, but let us be clear: we have only ever eliminated one virus—smallpox—and that after many decades. We face significant harm, here and around the world, from viruses, bacteria and fungal conditions, but even with a vaccine, thousands die of flu every year. We all acknowledge the incredible efforts of the scientific community here and around the world to create a vaccine, but they rightly warn that they cannot be sure of success. As the PM himself acknowledged, after 18 years, we still have not found an effective vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome. Furthermore, if we do get an effective vaccine, it will not be effective for all—no vaccine is—and that is before we consider the constraints of production and the need to overcome resistance from anti-vaxxers. As I have said before, we probably will have to learn to co-exist with the virus while maintaining the economy and society. The sooner we face up to that, the better.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u486	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Spellar, John Francis	Debate request for industry impact	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons	I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. Iran is no longer a place of cultural, historical and human rights diversity. Under General Soleimani and the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its involvement with terrorist groups across the world, Iran has the blood of thousands of innocents on its hands. Iran has said that it will continue to pursue nuclear power. It has also stated that it will not rest until Israel is destroyed. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to provide help and support for Israel in the light of the threat from Iran against its so-called enemy? Further, will he publicly state again that this great nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland stands alongside Israel at all times?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons.u225	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-07	Shannon, Richard James	Support for Israel against Iran	2020-01-07 00:00:00	2020-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-lords	My Lords, I cannot speak for other countries; they will make their decisions on who qualifies and who does not qualify for the Human Rights Council. However, like other member states, I hope, in making a decision we will certainly consider very carefully the human rights records of countries which aspire to speak about human rights at the HRC.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-lords.u217	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-22	Ahmad, Tariq	Consider human rights records carefully	2020-07-22 00:00:00	2020-07-22 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising those issues, which are myths that need to be dispelled, although I understand his concerns. The CEDAW report talks about the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which is why a woman who is raped in Northern Ireland and seeks a termination after becoming pregnant will face a longer prison sentence than her attacker. It is why, in November, a mother who bought abortion pills online for her child—she was a child, because she was a 15-year-old girl in an abusive relationship—faces a jail sentence We must deal with the effects of this anachronistic, ancient law in Northern Ireland. My constituents, and constituents across England and Wales, are exempted from that Act, but it does not mean a free-for-all. In fact, new clause 10 is crafted in terms of statutory instruments under the Northern Ireland Act I am mindful that the British Medical Association, the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Royal College of Midwives, and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists have all set out proposals for medical guidance. Absolutely, abortion should be regulated. Absolutely, there should be clear guidelines. Nobody is seeking to change the term limit we have in England and Wales. The question is whether the law should be underpinned by criminal legislation or medical regulation, which is what new clause 10 would allow us to consider. It would therefore allow us to answer the question about the inequality of experience between my constituents in Walthamstow and the constituents of the hon. Member for North Antrim (Ian Paisley) in Northern Ireland A thousand women from Northern Ireland have had to travel to England and Wales to have an abortion in the last year, and those are just the women who can travel. What a horrible, lonely journey to ask somebody to make at the most vulnerable moment in their life. That option is not available to women in an abusive relationship, who cannot get childcare or who cannot afford to travel New clause 10 is carefully crafted to respect the fact that, at the moment, we do not have an Assembly. If there were an Assembly, it could step in and deal with the criticisms that have been levelled at us by the UN. It could deal with the decisions made by the Supreme Court, which have not been enacted only because of a technicality. New clause 10 would mean these situations can be dealt with. Medical regulations could be introduced, but it would be done through a statutory instrument. It does not prescribe what the regulations would be, so it does not remove any of the protections the hon. Gentleman talks about.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons.u239	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Creasy, Stella Judith	Addressing Northern Ireland abortion laws	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-26-commons	The first review of Kirklees being in tier 3 will be on 16 December. Will the Secretary of State please confirm that his Department will consult local MPs, council leaders and the local director of public health? Will he publish the full numerical criteria so that we know what we need to achieve to get out of tier 3? Will the Government support Kirklees in delivering mass testing? Finally, will the Secretary of State have a conversation with the Chancellor about delivering extra financial support for our hospitality businesses?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-26-commons.u285	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-26	McCartney, Jason	Tier 3 review and support requests	2020-11-26 00:00:00	2020-11-26 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-20-commons	During this lockdown, we have seen numerous cases of broadcast media interviewing people in a manner that suggests they are independent experts, whereas they are in fact partisan political activists. That, of course, culminated in the notorious “Panorama” programme last month, but there are many other examples. Can we therefore have a debate on the guidelines that broadcasters are meant to use in order to provide their viewers with an informed picture of what they are actually watching?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-20-commons.u153	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-20	Johnson, Gareth Alan	Media interview ethics debate request	2020-05-20 00:00:00	2020-05-20 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons	I share the last sentiments expressed by the hon. Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Neil Gray). We remember the man I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) for securing this debate, because John Smith is still a towering figure for many of us. The words spoken today on both sides of the House are tribute to the high regard in which John Smith is held not simply by those who knew him but by those who are, in some ways, heirs to what he stood for The hon. Member for Stirling (Stephen Kerr) is right in saying that Conservative Members claim John Smith as a fellow parliamentarian, which is right and proper. And it is right that the Scots in this Chamber claim John as a Scot, and they should be proud that John was such a proud Scot. We, of course, claim him as Labour, because John was Labour. Whatever John Smith was in his life, he stood for the values and principles on which the Labour party was founded and he took them forward so ably It is almost axiomatic that John’s moral view of the world was that social justice was at the heart of what he stood for in politics and of what he believed the Labour party had to stand for. That is an eternal message for my party, and politics across the world needs people who will challenge injustice on behalf of those who cannot speak up for themselves—we have heard those words repeated on numerous occasions—and that is the hallmark of what John Smith was all about John Smith was, in many ways, a model Member of Parliament from a Chief Whip’s point of view. Madam Deputy Speaker, as a former Chief Whip you will know the value of such discipline. The present Labour Chief Whip, my right hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East (Mr Brown), will not be dismayed if I point out, as others have done, that although John Smith broke the Whip on only one occasion, he did so on a matter of fundamental principle—his passionate belief that Britain is a necessary part of a larger structure, the then European Economic Community. He could not, therefore, go along with the mainstream of Labour votes at the time. I therefore use this opportunity to quote another leader of the Labour party who is known for having broken the Labour Whip once or twice, the present Leader of the Opposition. He has asked me to read these words into the record: “John Smith was Labour to his core. His politics were those of a genuine social democrat—he promoted equality, supported trade unionism, and believed in a kinder, more caring society Not only that, but he was an exceptionally decent and inclusive Leader of the Labour Party. I joined the Labour Party in the 1960s, and of all the Labour leaders I knew, John was the one I admired the most I will never forget his speech to the Labour Party Conference in 1993…promising the same legal rights to every worker from day one of their employment, part-time or full-time, temporary or permanent It has taken too long, but the next Labour government will deliver on John’s commitment His death was a tragedy, not just for his own family and friends, but also for the Labour Party, and the country as a whole. ” What lies within those words is sometimes missed. It has been said today that John Smith was moderate and right-of-centre in Labour party terms. Actually, that is not a strictly accurate interpretation of what he was about; he was more radical than people believe. The fact is that he was comfortable with Labour’s traditions—comfortable talking about employment rights and advocating them, as I heard him do many times in this Chamber when he was shadow Secretary of State for Employment during the passage of Norman Tebbit’s draconian anti trade union Bill. John Smith was a passionate defender of the rights of people in the workplace. He was sponsored by the Amalgamated Society of Boilermakers, along with my good friend Gerald Kaufman—perhaps the two most unlikely boilermakers ever to hit this place. Nevertheless, they were committed to the principles of that union and what trade unionism was about in the Britain of that time, and that remains relevant to the United Kingdom of today As has been mentioned, John could also claim significance in the debate about the minimum wage. I was on the shadow employment team for a time during that period: we were told by the Government that the minimum wage would cost 1 million jobs, which was then hiked to 2 million jobs. It did not cost those jobs, of course—it was part of creating a fairer society. The interesting point is that while John Smith was leader the issue was massively controversial, even within the Labour party. Some of our major trade unions at the time were saying that it would erode wages for their own members. That argument was strenuously put forward, but John Smith was one of those who said that that argument could not prevail. People were on derisory wages that have been forgotten now. Hairdressers were sometimes on wages so outrageous that it was impossible for them to support their families. Fighting for that kind of social justice was radical, and the hallmark of the then Leader of the Opposition John had enormous intellectual gifts as a parliamentarian. Almost every friend and colleague I have spoken to about him has a memory of John’s decision-making capacity. He would come to quick and robust conclusions about what was right and proper, sometimes on issues that mattered but did not necessarily have a strong policy bent. Lord Foulkes—then George Foulkes, shadow Foreign Minister—travelled with John Smith to China. They had many engagements with the Chinese Deputy Prime Minister, who would raise questions of policy. John would turn to George, who told me he would stammer out some quick response about what he hoped the policy was. John instantly turned it into something that sounded credible and competent, and was accepted by the Chinese Deputy Prime Minister as the voice of a party ready for government I saw John Smith in a similar light when he took on controversial policies. The promotion of comprehensive education was an issue in the ’90s just as it is today. John was easily persuaded that social justice was on the side of taking forward that reforming step. That was controversial, but he was prepared to take on controversy if he believed it was the right thing to do As a politician, John was gifted and formidable in this place. Reference was made to the YouTube videos that David Ward has made available. David will be glad to know that I watched one of them—it is some years since we have seen each other, so I am delighted to see him in the Under-Gallery—and it was interesting to see how full the Chamber was when John Smith spoke. He was one of those people: everyone would be encouraged to come in to listen to him—to his bulldozer drive against the Government of the day, his forensic skills, his strong intellectual ability and, of course, his devastating wit. Sometimes, that devastating wit was most telling of all. The then Prime Minister John Major had apparently written a chapter in a book about football called “We’ll Support You Evermore”; as John Smith said at the time, it was obviously not a Tory party publication. I would venture to say, without introducing too much bitter politics into the debate, that we could make the same claim today My right hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East will not be unhappy if I recall the fact that although people talk about John being a kind man—and he was; he was very forgiving and prepared to heal the enmities, or at least some of them, that existed in his time—he was also very caustic when he wanted to be. My right hon. Friend was at the Dispatch Box as a junior shadow Treasury Minister being harangued by Government Members, three of whom stood up to challenge him to give way on some point. Gordon Brown was on my right hon. Friend’s right, giving him a stream of statistics and a robust intellectual defence of the Labour case; John Smith turned to my right hon. Friend and said, “Just pick the most stupid. ” That was not reported in the Hansard of the day I wish to turn for a few moments to John Smith as a family man. Those of us who met and know Elizabeth—she is Baroness Smith, but Elizabeth is probably a kinder way to refer to her—know that she is still intensely proud all these years on, just as John’s daughters, Sarah, Jane and Catherine, are intensely proud of their father. John was a family man, although as Elizabeth said to me, as he was in political life, he was a family man in very short spurts. They still enormously value the family holidays and family time they had on the island of Iona. It was so important, not only for John as a human being, getting himself away from being the man of politics, but for John as a man more widely, with his family being part of something wider for that wider human being. In John’s memory, the John Smith Trust continues to do incredibly valuable and powerful work, particularly in central Asia. John was passionately committed not simply to social justice but to the principles of good government that have been carried forward in the determination to train a generation of political leaders in central Asia in particular. They bear his name as fellows of the John Smith Trust. That is a remarkable signal to us all The hon. Member for Airdrie and Shotts said that John Smith was a humble man; I am not quite sure that I entirely agree with that description, because one of the good things about John’s background—not only his family background but his time at the University of Glasgow debating society and all the rest—was that he had confidence in himself, his politics and his belief system. He had confidence in his humanity, which is important. So he was not a humble man, but he was a simple man. A simple man is probably the most vividly fitting description when we think of the place that John chose for his burial on Iona: a very simple grave and memorial. Something very simple for a very decent man who graced this place, graced our politics and graced those who knew him.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons.u390	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-09	Lloyd, Anthony Joseph	Tribute to John Smith’s legacy	2019-05-09 00:00:00	2019-05-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-12-commons	Does the Minister agree that we should support workers who keep small businesses like cafes and pubs going? In his so-called “Good Work Plan”, the Business Secretary boasted that the Government will ensure that all tips go to workers in full. Where exactly is the Bill that was first promised three years ago?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-12-commons.u131	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-12	Peacock, Stephanie Louise	Support workers tip regulations overdue	2019-02-12 00:00:00	2019-02-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords	Noble Lords will be pleased to know that I am finishing my speech. As a metals trader for more than half a century—I shall change tone here—I want to finish by saying something about trade. In the financial markets, there is a fear of global stagnation. I read this afternoon about the American factory output being disappointing again. While this has very little to do with our leaving the EU, Brexit could be a can opener for new trade initiatives. By breathing life into a world somewhat obsessed by tariffs, it will potentially end up boosting the global economy by breaking up the rather sedentary three big blocs of the US, China and the EU. The world needs competition to be encouraged and Britain could be an agent for that. So instead of a harbinger of doom, Brexit could be a force for reform, both economically and politically, but we have to get on with delivering it. It is, after all, the will of the people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords.u162	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Farmer, Michael	Brexit potential for trade reform	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-25-commons	On average, Wales received £400 million a year from EU structural and investment funds, sadly well above the UK per capita average due to our greater relative need. Promises have been made that Wales will receive not a penny less from the UK shared prosperity fund. The Chancellor has stated that he will match total UK funding, but will he also confirm that Wales’ share will not be diminished, that it will represent additional investment, and that the fund will be allocated according to need?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-25-commons.u156	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-25	Lake, Ben Morgan	Ensure Wales maintains EU funding	2020-11-25 00:00:00	2020-11-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	PC	Plaid Cymru	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons	I can guarantee that the mental health funding will be ring-fenced; and I want us, from the House, to pay tribute to the hon. Lady’s mum We are going to have more nurses, and I am delighted that we already have a record number of registered nurses, a record number of midwives, a record number of nursing associates and a record number of nurses in training. If the current trends continue, 36,000 nurses will join the NHS each year from the domestic and overseas workforce, which means that we will have more than 140,000 new nurses by 2024. However, we need more nurses now, and we will have 50,000 more by the end of this Parliament. That is a critical manifesto commitment on which we intend to deliver We need the right number of nurses and we need them to have the right skills, with nursing increasingly becoming a highly skilled as well as a caring role. From September this year, we will give every student nurse a training grant worth at least £5,000 to support them in their studies and ensure recruitment and retention. We are also expanding the routes into nursing with more nursing associates and nursing apprenticeships, making it easier to climb the ladder to become a fully registered nurse, and prioritising the care of our nursing staff to encourage more of them to stay in the NHS Of course, that training grant will also apply to midwives, paramedics, dieticians and all allied health professionals. Too often, the media use “doctors and nurses” as shorthand, and sometimes, if I am honest, we do that in this House, too. We should instead recognise the essential contribution of our allied health professionals, without whom our NHS family is incomplete and on whom our increasing move to multidisciplinary teams depends. This £2 billion training package is in addition to the funding contained in this Bill Finally, as well as revenue and training, the NHS also needs more money for infrastructure. On that point, I will give way to the hon. Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant).	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons.u352	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-27	Hancock, Matthew John David	More nurses and mental health funding	2020-01-27 00:00:00	2020-01-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-21-lords	As it stands, the Government are not going to change the benefit cap, but it will be reviewed at some point. The noble Baroness’s point about people’s circumstances in terms of loss of income and not being able to move house is a very fair one; I thank her for raising it and I will take it back to the department. Tomorrow we have the all-Peers briefing with the Minister for Welfare Delivery, and I urge the noble Baroness to raise this point yet again.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-21-lords.u81	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-21	Stedman-Scott, Deborah	Benefit cap review promised	2020-05-21 00:00:00	2020-05-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords	My Lords, I join noble Lords in thanking the Minister for the thoughtful way in which he introduced this important debate. In doing so, I declare my interests as professor of surgery at University College London, chairman of UCLPartners and a member of your Lordships’ Science and Technology Committee, which is chaired so ably by my noble friend Lord Patel Quite rightly, the debate has welcomed many of the findings in this important review in achieving the important objective of driving forward greater equity in post-18 education and emphasising the importance of providing opportunities for our fellow citizens to avail themselves of lifelong learning. However, I will concentrate on the potential implications of some of the report’s recommendations in terms of our universities’ ability to conduct research Of course, it is clear that the question of research was not in the review’s remit or terms of reference, but it is important for Her Majesty’s Government, when considering the review’s recommendations, to understand how they might have an impact on the capacity of higher education institutions to conduct research. Clearly, those institutions are complex ecosystems where potentially affecting one funding source will have knock-on implications on universities’ ability to perform other functions, such as research. As a country, we recognise the importance of research for our future national interests. Of course, we have a newly identified target to devote 2.4% of GDP to research and development expenditure in our country by 2027. That is important, but many people have argued that it does not go far enough to secure an innovation economy that will be able to compete globally in the decades to come. Nevertheless, that is the target. To achieve that expenditure, we will need to produce by 2027 at least 150,000 graduates capable of contributing to that research and development effort in both the public and private sectors Yet when we look at our universities, the research base is vulnerable, as things stand. We know that, despite the objective of achieving full economic cost recovery for research in our universities, this is currently not being achieved. On research expenditure for Research Council projects, universities have to find some 28% of the cost from other sources. If one looks at research supported by the European Union, universities have to find 35% of that cost from sources other than the funding source for that particular research. From UK charities, they have to find some 40% of the cost, and even for industry-supported studies, some 22% shortfall is identified in the funding provided for those research projects. Overall, in the year 2010-11, some 78% of full economic cost was recovered from the funding source. In 2016-17, that had fallen to 69.4% of the full funding requirement. This cost universities in that particular financial year some £3.7 billion of funding that they had to find beyond the support provided from research. Clearly, that is an unstable situation. Bearing in mind the importance of that research to our broader national interest, that is something that needs to be considered Your Lordships’ Science and Technology Committee has recently been receiving evidence for its inquiry into the funding of the research base in universities and heard from members of the independent Augar review at a session last week. Members of the review rightly identified that this was not a question for them but doubted that there was a very significant cross-subsidy between the tuition or teaching income and research activity in universities. However, evidence provided by the universities themselves to that same inquiry indicates that there is a very substantial cross-subsidy between teaching and research, some of it from domestic tuition fees and a substantial amount from international tuition fees. Therefore, when the Government consider the important and justifiable recommendations on increased support for further education and lifelong learning, they must consider how they are going to address the question of stabilising the research base in our universities As we heard from my noble friend Lord Patel, on the one hand there is an important move towards greater equity for our fellow citizens, as demanded by the education establishment, but on the other hand we must be clear about how we secure a research base to drive broader economic benefits. In this regard, do Her Majesty’s Government believe that it is appropriate to undertake some kind of formal evaluation of potential cross-subsidies in our universities, understand what the extent of those are and then determine how best to address them? Do they believe that there should be cross-subsidy between teaching—whatever the source of that teaching income—and the research base? If they do not, how would they propose to address that question going forward in a more transparent fashion The other issue about which I am concerned in respect of securing the research base in our universities is the future disposition of the teaching grant and the particular emphasis on the teaching grant being set in some way with regard to either the social or economic value of the taught subject. This is an interesting concept. Will it apply purely at the national level, where the subjects being identified in that fashion would then have a teaching grant equally distributed across institutions, or will that assessment be made for individual institutions in terms of the economic and social value derived from an individual subject? Which institution or body will undertake that evaluation and what metrics will be used to determine that? This is an important question because, if teaching income is in some way going to continue to cross-subsidise research, will research metrics also inform that particular evaluation Then we must consider other government policy, such as the industrial strategy that has a place or geographical emphasis, for instance on the development of the northern powerhouse. That could equally be affected if the teaching grant for subjects undermines the capacity and sustainability in universities. It might undermine the capacity to deliver that broader geographical agenda with regard to the industrial strategy and drive a research base for economic development in different regions of our country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords.u130	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Kakkar, Ajay	University research funding and cross-subsidy	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-commons	Again, my hon. Friend will have to wait for the detail of the White Paper, but I have made it, I hope, very clear, and am happy to make it clear again, that I believe that social media companies have responsibilities in this space. They should take those responsibilities seriously, and if they do not there should be consequences.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-commons.u11	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-07	Wright, Jeremy Paul	Social media companies' responsibilities emphasized	2019-03-07 00:00:00	2019-03-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	Many of my constituents, including Nimmi Soni, have written to me with their concerns about the Government’s commitment to protecting food standards. The Secretary of State is right that his party’s manifesto promised not to compromise on food standards in trade deals, but twice—twice—the Government have refused to support Labour amendments to put that into law. If over 70% of people do not want us selling food imported from countries with lower food standards, and more than 1 million people have signed a National Farmers Union petition for British food standards to be put into law, why are the Government refusing to do what the public want and expect? The country has a right to know.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u11	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Malhotra-Saluja, Seema	Government neglecting food standards mandate	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-10-commons	It is a pleasure to follow my parliamentary neighbour, the hon. Member for Wolverhampton South West (Eleanor Smith). I would like to focus my remarks on the rationale for the decision I have taken, which I believe to be in the best interests of my constituents and this country, on the vote next Tuesday I have received plenty of advice from constituents, as I am sure all hon. Members have, much of it contradictory, reflecting the division in the country since the referendum. Many have asked me to represent their views, which, given the range of views and the physical impossibility of being in both Division Lobbies at the same time, it is not possible to achieve. I stood on a manifesto in 2015 that pledged to respect the result of the referendum. I voted to remain in 2016, but 57% of my constituents voted to leave. I have accepted the referendum result, and indeed I stood on a manifesto in 2017 that pledged to do so. That is why I voted with the vast majority of Members of this House—498 to 114, with a majority of each of the Conservative, Labour and Democratic Unionist parties—to invoke article 50 The Government have had the most complex negotiations to undertake of any Government since the second world war, as evidenced by the sheer length of the EU withdrawal agreement and the number of pieces of secondary legislation that the European Statutory Instruments Committee, on which I sit, is currently scrutinising. There have undoubtedly been many challenges presented by the EU and its 27 other members throughout the negotiations. On some of these we have prevailed, and on some we have not Although I would not have started the negotiations by accepting the EU framework for the negotiations in the way we did, I have accepted that leaving the EU after 43 years of membership, during which our laws, regulations and standards have become increasingly intertwined, will require a negotiated deal, and negotiation requires compromise. I spent 20-odd years negotiating as an adviser to companies around the world, so I know that every negotiation comes down to the last moments, when the final compromises have to be made. We are now at that point. The word “compromise” has been used across the Chamber today, and it was particularly well encapsulated by my right hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), the right hon. Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) and the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) The reason why we are debating this issue so long after the invocation of article 50 is primarily its complexity, but coming a close second is the lack of consensus in the House, which is partly a result of the balance of arithmetic in the House following the 2017 election. We still do not have a consensus, which is why we have had to delay the debate. The only consensus in the House was on the decision to invoke article 50 in the first place We have heard from Conservative Members who have a strong tradition of seeking to leave the EU, and I respect their conviction and consistency of purpose. Some of them, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Maldon (Mr Whittingdale) earlier and my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Royston Smith) just now, have made it clear that they are willing to compromise and support an orderly withdrawal if the Irish backstop issue can be removed or time-limited. I hope the Government will find a way to give them satisfaction before we vote next Tuesday, but if not, I believe that a willingness to compromise among Members from all parties is essential in order that we can do our duty as representatives of the people of this country and bring this matter to an orderly conclusion Opposition Members have told us that they will not support the deal because it does not reflect what they would like to see in a deal. Some have been straightforward in acknowledging that they wish to ignore the referendum and remain in the EU, but others have not, and they have not come up with any pragmatic suggestions as to what could be done to improve the deal. The official Opposition Front-Bench team has been consistent about one thing, and one thing only: it will not do anything at all to help, and will only try to bring about a general election, because that is its purpose. Opposition Front Benchers are not interested in compromise, whatever their warm words earlier. They have made no suggestions whatsoever on how to improve the deal The prospects are extremely alarming to those watching the debate from outside and for the countless businesses and constituents who are urging us to get on with it and provide some certainty to the nation about how we leave the EU in an orderly fashion. That is why, despite the deal’s imperfections and my concerns about aspects of it, I shall support it in next week’s vote. I will not support any proposal to have a second referendum, because that would be to deny completely the initial referendum, and it would perpetuate the division in this country that we can frankly no longer afford.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-10-commons.u499	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-10	Dunne, Philip Martin	Support flawed EU withdrawal deal	2019-01-10 00:00:00	2019-01-10 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-24-commons	No, not in the same way. Standardised assessment is part of a suite of methods that we use, and Ofsted inspection is, of course, another very important part. The fact is that before we had standardised assessment, there were individual schools and, indeed, substantial parts of the country where children could have been let down not for one or a few years but for many years, and nothing was done about it, starting with the problem that nobody knew about it. SATs are a very important part of our architecture to raise attainment and, critically, to narrow the gap in performance between the rich and the poor.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-24-commons.u101	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-24	Hinds, Damian Patrick George	Defense of standardized assessments	2019-06-24 00:00:00	2019-06-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for the explanation of the purpose and content of this draft order, to which we are not opposed. Having said that, I hope that the Minister feels more confident than I do that she fully understands it. Much of what I want to say is taken unashamedly from the recent report from the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, and also, in part, from the wording of the Explanatory Memorandum. I will also raise a couple of points in the light of what was said when the draft order was considered in the Commons The Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 sets out the arrangements under which the Disclosure and Barring Service may bar individuals from certain roles which involve working with children or vulnerable people in England and Wales. It also includes provisions setting out the relationship between the barred lists maintained under devolved legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Section 74 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 amended the 2006 Act to place restrictions on duplication with the Scotland and Northern Ireland barred lists. The purpose of this order, as I understand it, is to implement that statutory restriction with regard to Scotland, so that the barring lists of England, Wales and Scotland do not duplicate each other. The restrictions on duplication under the 2012 Act apparently arise from concerns that double barring might create a further burden on individuals who wish to challenge their inclusion on the barred list, as they would need to pursue separate appeal and review processes in each jurisdiction. Duplication also gives rise to the potential that, if an individual’s challenge was successful in one jurisdiction but not another, he or she would remain barred across the whole of the United Kingdom The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee asked why, given that the restriction on duplication was introduced in 2012, it was only now being implemented. The answer from the Home Office was that responsibility for the Disclosure and Barring Service was changed to the Home Office following the passage of the 2012 Act, and the delay in bringing the measure forward was an oversight. What changes in processes or procedures have now been put in place to prevent what appears to be a seven-year oversight happening again in the Home Office? It does not inspire confidence in governance arrangements, which one would have thought might have been of some concern to the Home Office board—assuming that body still exists In its report on this draft order, the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee said that the Disclosure and Barring Service did not have the technical capability for the automatic exchange of information with Scotland. The committee went on to say that, while it had no information about the efficiency or effectiveness of the current cross-checking system, it did have concerns that it appeared to depend on the vigilance of officials who operate the lists. Could the Minister comment on that point from the committee about the current arrangements and the efficiency and effectiveness of the current cross-checking arrangements? Also, what assurances, backed up by hard evidence, can the Government now provide The Committee also reported that a new IT system is planned, to make such cross-checks automatically. It seems that the current IT contract has been terminated, but that there is an extension notice until January 2020 to ensure continuity of services while the procurement process transitions to new suppliers. The committee went on to say that the Home Office could not offer a clearer indication of when the capability to undertake automatic checking of Scotland's barred list would be in place Continuing, the committee suggested that the House might wish to seek assurances, which are what I am now asking from the Government, about what mitigation is in place to offset any risk that information about individuals on a barred list in one jurisdiction may inadvertently fail to be shared with another jurisdiction. Also, will the Government provide further information about when and how the new IT system will achieve compliance with the requirements of Section 74 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, to which I referred earlier During the debate on this order in the Commons, the shadow Minister expressed her concern that, if the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and children is to be taken seriously—as I do not doubt for one moment that the Government do—we need to bear in mind that some cases of child abuse, trafficking and rape appear to be being dealt with by out-of-court disposal orders, which apparently means that they are omitted from DBS checks. The Minister in the Commons did not appear to respond to that point. Could the Minister now respond on behalf of the Government? Are there examples of such serious offences being dealt with by out-of-court disposal orders—and, if so, do the Government take the view that there is no potential danger in excluding them from DBS checks A further point was raised by a Conservative MP when this order was debated in the Commons. He drew attention to the fact that people posing a risk to children was an international problem and not simply a UK problem, and asked what progress had been made in the exchange of information with other countries. The same MP also asked about the length of time taken to get DBS clearance, and referred in particular to teachers who were new to a school, or newly qualified, because in the past it had led to such teachers not being able to take up their position. He asked for an assurance that the time taken to give clearance to essential public workers in particular was not an ongoing problem. The Minister in the Commons promptly gave that assurance, but gave no information on how long such clearance was now taking, and said that the list was, “reducing at an acceptable rate”. —[Official Report, Commons, 18/6/19; col. 160. ] That is not the same as saying that clearance times are now deemed to be acceptable. Can the Minister provide information on how long DBS clearance is now taking? If it is above an acceptable time span, what is the target figure Finally, the Minister in the Commons said that she would be writing to Tim Loughton, the MP concerned, on the issue he had raised about exchange of information with other countries. I too am interested in that point, and I would be grateful if I could be sent a copy of the Commons Minister’s reply.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-lords.u127	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-26	Rosser, Richard Andrew	DBS checks and governance issues	2019-06-26 00:00:00	2019-06-26 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for raising the subject; yes, I would be very happy to meet him. The sector has been the subject of focus. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, which is responsible for enforcing the national living wage, and cross-border agencies have been doing extensive work, but any details that my hon. Friend may supply would be helpful.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons.u87	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-21	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Happy to meet discuss details	2020-01-21 00:00:00	2020-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-16-commons	My hon. Friend makes an important point. The Treasury, my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury and others are in conversations with the industry more broadly—I believe that more conversations are set to occur tomorrow—to ensure that businesses get the support that they need and are treated in a fair way Our investment in the financial health of the nation includes £40 million for literal vaccines, research and testing, because we base our decisions on the bedrock of the science. This national response is made possible because of our careful stewardship of the British economy over the past 10 years—because record numbers of businesses are making, selling and hiring; because millions more people are in work, earning and paying taxes; and because we have backed the NHS with a record long-term funding settlement This is a national effort and we will get through this together, as the Prime Minister has said. In Government, we will do the right thing at the right time, working through each stage of our coronavirus action plan guided by the science and the advice of our medical and scientific experts. We will stop at nothing to defeat the disease, but we will succeed only if everyone does their bit: washing their hands regularly; self-isolating for seven days if they have symptoms, such as a new, continuous, persistent cough or a high temperature; and looking out for their neighbours. In that spirit, may I thank the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth), my constituency neighbour, and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Justin Madders), for the constructive approach that they have taken since the start of the outbreak? They are doing their bit. They are good and decent people and public servants, and their approach is a prime example of how we can work together during this crisis.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-16-commons.u161	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-16	Argar, Edward John Comport	National response guided by science	2020-03-16 00:00:00	2020-03-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-lords	My Lords, the Hybrid Sitting of the House will now begin. A limited number of Members are here in the Chamber, respecting social distancing. Other Members will participate remotely, but all Members will be treated equally, wherever they are. For Members participating remotely, microphones will unmute shortly before they are to speak. Please accept any on-screen prompt to unmute. Microphones will be muted again after each speech. I ask noble Lords to be patient if there are any short delays as we switch between physical and remote participants Oral Questions will now commence. Please can those asking supplementary questions keep them short and confined to two points, and can Ministers’ answers also be brief?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-lords.u1	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-24	Alderdice, John	Hybrid Sitting starts now	2020-06-24 00:00:00	2020-06-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons	On the key points of people with mental health problems being signed off by one doctor and a loosening of the regulations relating to children with special needs, what measures can be put in place, by local authorities or others, so that there is a review mechanism on those two very crucial points for vulnerable people?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons.u210	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-23	West, Catherine Elizabeth	Review measures for vulnerable individuals	2020-03-23 00:00:00	2020-03-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-lords	Is my noble friend aware that this review is not before time, in that well over 10,000 appeals are bogged down in the agency at the moment? The challenge element does not work because the portal crashes; the check element does not work because it cannot be edited or amended. Against that background, is it not extraordinary that the agency allows all the retailers I am talking about, let alone other businesses, to incur huge costs in professional advice and have their cash flows adversely affected? Rather than having it at the end of 2019, I urge my noble friend to start the review on 1 March 2019.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-lords.u20	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Morris, Michael	Review urgently needed to address backlog	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons	I am grateful that the Government have provided Kent with an additional 184 police officers, but will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating Kent’s excellent police and crime commissioner, Matthew Scott, who, in his four years in office, has recruited 450 officers over and above the Government-funded number? That means we now have 3,847 officers in Kent, which is the highest number on record.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons.u8	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-14	Henderson, Gordon Leonard	Increased police officers in Kent	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords	My Lords, the Hybrid Sitting of the House will now begin. Some Members are here in the Chamber, respecting social distancing, others are participating remotely, but all Members will be treated equally Oral Questions will now commence. Please can those asking supplementary questions keep them short and confined to two points? I ask that Ministers’ answers are also brief.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords.u1	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-07	Fowler, Peter	Hybrid Sitting begins now	2020-09-07 00:00:00	2020-09-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-lords	My Lords, I congratulate the Government on getting COP 26 in Glasgow. It is a great thing for the country. It is also important because of the climate emergency which the other place has declared. I was pleased to hear the Prime Minister say in October that there would be a cabinet committee for climate change, to ensure that it was across Government. How many times has it met under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-lords.u82	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-15	Teverson, Robin	Climate action committee meetings inquiry	2020-01-15 00:00:00	2020-01-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-commons	I have Strepsils, Mr Speaker Our most popular tourist attractions are our national museums, led by the British Museum with more than 6 million visitors last year, but we also have some hidden treasures in our regional and local museums that have been squeezed dreadfully by the issues with local government funding. What plans does the Secretary of State have to help investment in that important part of our cultural heritage, which helps to educate future generations, boost regional identities and diversify tourist interest away from the capital?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-commons.u5	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-03	Loughton, Timothy Paul	Museum funding support needed	2019-10-03 00:00:00	2019-10-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons	The year 2020 has been grim for so many of us. Nobody wants the restrictions, but they are necessary and I welcome them, and I will therefore be voting with the Government this evening on all the motions The retrospective nature of this legislation has been difficult to stomach. Going on recess and then facing this on the Friday was difficult for me, as it was for all MPs and constituents, but this measure is not being imposed for any reason other than the public health imperative. At the back of our minds, we must always remember that I say all the time to constituents who write to me, “This is not personal. The fact that you can’t go and see family at Christmas, the fact that you are locked away for this awful winter—there is nothing personal there at all. It is simply the Government doing what they have to do to keep people safe. ” I have had many letters from people in Bracknell and the wider constituency over the past few months. I understand their frustrations completely and I empathise with them. Having Christmas plans curtailed at the last minute was awful. Nobody takes any pleasure at all in restricting people from seeing their loved ones, but it is the duty of any responsible Government to take tough and unpopular decisions to protect lives. It is a sign of good leadership that the Government are making these decisions I again commend my constituents. The public have been resolute in the main in abiding by the rules, and the self-discipline we have seen across the UK this year has been phenomenal. We welcome today’s news of a second vaccine—it is fantastic—so there is light at the end of the tunnel, and we must look forward to a more positive 2021 It has been a difficult few weeks in my constituency. Bracknell went from tier 2 to tier 4 in a matter of days, which was a bitter blow to the morale and mental health of so many. As of today, we are at a rate of 568 cases per 100,000. It is no exaggeration to say that it has septupled in the past month. Over a six-week period, that is a 1,000% increase in the rate in my constituency, and it is mirrored elsewhere locally. In Wokingham it is 413, in Reading it is 452, in Windsor and Maidenhead it is 509, and in Slough it is 646. The fact is that the virus is ripping through the constituency and beyond. This is the wave that we were fortunate not to have had so far Locally, our hospitals are really struggling. Wexham Park, Royal Berkshire and Frimley Park Hospitals are at max capacity, and today the Thames Valley Local Resilience Forum was almost at the point of declaring a major incident in Berkshire because it has got that bad. When the stats are presented, it is irresponsible not to react to the exponential increase in cases, however tough it is to stomach. A decision not to act would have been a grave dereliction of duty. To be a critical friend to the Government, there are three areas that I would like to concentrate on very quickly. First, on gyms, we need to make sure we do not curtail freedoms to the extent that people cannot exercise. We have known about the restrictions on the fitness and leisure industry for some time, so I ask the Government please to review the rules on gyms and all forms of exercise and sport so that life can continue as best it can for many Small businesses have also had it really bad and some are on their last legs. We have seen giant online corporations such as Amazon and Google dominating the market, continuing to sell goods with impunity and making it increasingly difficult for the high street to survive. There must please be more support for those businesses. We have also heard about the excluded, and we cannot ignore them. It is important that we do whatever we can, even at this stage, to help them I welcome the Government’s stance on keeping schools open. That is a necessity for our children and their parents, many of whom need to go back to work, but I implore the Government to maximise testing in schools and roll out vaccinations for teachers at the earliest opportunity Notwithstanding the grim nature of 2020, we have much to look forward to, and we must keep the faith. Last week, I visited the fantastic Bracknell vaccination centre, run by the East Berkshire clinical commissioning group, and what I saw there was simply amazing. I saw people in their 80s and 90s who had left home for the first time. I want to share with my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Paul Bristow) the hope that I saw, which was quite staggering. What I saw there was magnificent, and I commend everyone in the NHS, key workers and other key staff across the UK for what they are doing. We will get through this.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons.u511	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-30	Sunderland, James	Support for COVID-19 restrictions	2020-12-30 00:00:00	2020-12-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons	As I mentioned earlier, it was a privilege to be able to join the new permanent secretary to the Cabinet Office, Alex Chisholm, yesterday for the Civil Service Live event. I had the opportunity then, and I would like to repeat it now, to thank all public and civil servants across the United Kingdom, in the UK Government and the devolved Administrations, for the amazing hard work they have put in to helping us to deal with the covid crisis. I am sure the whole House would want to take this opportunity to thank our brilliant civil service.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons.u103	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-16	Gove, Michael Andrew	Thanks to civil servants	2020-07-16 00:00:00	2020-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-21-commons	Although my thoughts are with the people of South Yorkshire and businesses in South Yorkshire, my primary responsibility is to people in North Yorkshire. Will my hon. Friend help to scotch any rumours that are circulating that North Yorkshire is about to go into tier 2 when its rate of infection is well below the national average? If there is any need to put us in a higher tier, will he look to do that on a district-wide level, where there is significant variation across North Yorkshire, rather than purely at county-wide level?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-21-commons.u175	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-21	Hollinrake, Kevin Paul	Preserve North Yorkshire's current tier	2020-10-21 00:00:00	2020-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords	My Lords, this amendment has been very important in enabling a wider debate. As we have been hearing, food security is fundamental to the welfare of the nation, in terms of health, diet, fitness for work and the ability to live life fully, but it also has implications for what our agricultural production does that accelerates climate change. It relates also to all the other impacts of climate change on our agriculture—a terrific and complex range of impacts In view of this, it seems simple and clear that we cannot afford to have a laid-back approach to reporting and accountability. There needs to be vigour and frequent reporting, as far as is reasonable. The Bill is currently too relaxed and complacent, and the debate has emphasised the importance of the first amendment in this group, which demands more frequent reporting. From that standpoint I am very glad that my noble friend has moved this amendment and am only too pleased to support it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords.u231	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-21	Judd, Frank Ashcroft	Support for frequent reporting amendment	2020-07-21 00:00:00	2020-07-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords	Is my noble friend aware that that is an encouraging Answer? Nevertheless, is it not time that the BBC faced up to the fact that it is a public service broadcaster, with a social responsibility to its listeners? Is it not a little surprising to have a consultation document of 50 pages-plus on the subject which seems to give the message that it is trying to wriggle out of that social responsibility? When it faced a not dissimilar problem for BBC overseas, when the Foreign Office removed the grant, the BBC took the decision to take advertising. We now have a situation where every hour of BBC broadcasting has three minutes of promos. Would that gap not be better used by taking advertising?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords.u4	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-21	Morris, Michael	BBC should take advertising	2019-01-21 00:00:00	2019-01-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords	It depends where you look at it from. We have heard from the noble Lord, Lord Framlingham, who has certainly been consistent over the years. He talked about despair, but I want to reflect to him the despair that would be felt in the West Midlands if HS2 were cancelled. It would have an absolutely devastating impact on our economic well-being. We are very vulnerable. With Brexit, the motor car industry is hugely vulnerable. Cancelling HS2 at the same time as there is economic uncertainty would be devastating for a region that, over the last two years, has grown more than any other apart from London My noble friend and the noble Lord’s committee have produced some very salient points about the HS2 budget and the appraisal system. There is no getting away from that. The question is: is that enough to cancel HS2 as a whole? To be fair to both noble Lords, that is not what they are saying. They are raising issues that need to be answered, and that is fair The noble Lord’s committee also focused on the north. It focused on the railway connections and referred to the 90 minutes that it takes to travel the 75 miles between Liverpool and Leeds. I do not dissent at all from what the committee has said about issues in the north, but I am disappointed that so little attention was given to similar issues in the Midlands. For instance, it takes 57 minutes to travel to Leicester from Birmingham, which are 46 miles apart, while the 51-mile trip to Nottingham takes 76 minutes. There is a large flow of people and work but it could be much, much bigger. There is no question but that road congestion—journeys take ages by road—and the very poor railway connections are impeding the development of a Midlands-type economy.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords.u152	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-23	Hunt, Philip Alexander	HS2 cancellation impacts Midlands economy	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-commons	I think you know what you have to do, given your experience of chairing Committees. The reasons certain people left the Labour party can be debated some other time, but this debate is not about that; it is about replacing existing members. I do not want to put words into his mouth, but I presume that Mr Wiggin will establish why the representation of political parties should reflect the make-up of the House when he winds up. This debate is about the replacement of two, let’s be honest, very popular Members. There is no doubt about that, but it is about their replacement, so it is quite narrow. I have allowed some freedom, but it cannot be a personal attack on one person.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-commons.u348	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-19	Hoyle, Lindsay Harvey	Replace outgoing members	2019-03-19 00:00:00	2019-03-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-commons	I thank the Minister for his response. Climate change is the single biggest threat not only to mankind, but to the planet. Does he agree with me that if we are to meet the climate change targets set out in the Paris agreement, more needs to be done to ensure that large financial institutions, including institutional investors such as pension funds, channel more investment into areas that do not actively harm our environment and contribute to climate change?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-commons.u29	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-19	Wakeford, Christian	More sustainable investment needed	2020-10-19 00:00:00	2020-10-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-commons	Absolutely. I join my hon. Friend in thanking our military for all the support they are giving at the moment. It is the case that we have 48 regional test centres up and running. Each has two teams of military capable of dispensing and administering tests at a distance. One thing we are keeping under review is how we can expand that capacity even further in the future. The role of the military has been absolutely vital. I commend, in particular, Alex Cooper, one of the ex-servicemen who has been absolutely critical to making sure that the Department of Health and Social Care can do everything possible to deliver testing.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-commons.u173	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-04-28	Gove, Michael Andrew	Commending military's role in testing	2020-04-28 00:00:00	2020-04-28 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons	My hon. Friend raises an important question. I highlighted earlier the £90 million from the strength in places fund that had been made available to the UK’s industrial strategy, making Wales fourth in the UK for the value of grants it receives. That works, absolutely as my hon. Friend highlights, on a cross-border basis, and the industrial strategy deliberately talks about cross-border growth corridors.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons.u36	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-15	Cairns, Alun Hugh	Cross-border industrial strategy funding	2019-05-15 00:00:00	2019-05-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons	The hon. Gentleman is disappointed with me, and that is a yoke I shall have to bear. It is, I fear, his default position to be disappointed with me, and I am afraid that in my answers today, his disappointment will only grow. I am sorry about that; none the less, I must proceed The House made a decision to be back in physical form and voted to return to physical voting—a system that is working effectively and ensures that our business can be done. It is essential for debates that we are here. The whole point of a debate is to challenge, to question, to intervene. That is not possible remotely. For Ministers, when we had that brief period of legislation going through remotely, it could not have been easier: all the Minister had to do was read out the prepared blurb. Nothing could be intervened upon; nothing could be questioned. [Interruption. ] When we are here, as I am heckled by the Labour Chief Whip, interventions can come from a sedentary position, which may get the pith and moment of the debate, as the right hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East (Mr Brown) is so good at doing. That leads to proper, informed debate. [Interruption. ] Even Mr Speaker is intervening now.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons.u154	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-15	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Importance of physical parliamentary debates	2020-10-15 00:00:00	2020-10-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-commons	Does my right hon. Friend share my concern for dentists, who have followed the rules over face, hands and space and all the precautions, and for whom the R rate has kept low, and barbers and hairdressers, who have done the same thing and followed all the regulations, accepting customers by appointment only, whose R rate is 0.05? Is it not time for those who follow the rules correctly to be rewarded, rather than stopped from operating their businesses?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-commons.u225	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-01	Shannon, Richard James	Reward rule-following businesses reopening	2020-12-01 00:00:00	2020-12-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons	First, I join my hon. Friend in recognising the work done by the Community Security Trust. It does such important and valuable work throughout the year, and I am pleased that the Government are able to support the work it does. He is absolutely right to say that one can never be too apologetic about antisemitism, but I think what we have heard sums up Labour under its leader: it loses the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) and it keeps the hon. Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson). That tells us all we need to know about the Labour leadership: they are present but not involved. Perhaps if the Labour leader actually wants to take action against racism, he would suspend the hon. Member for Derby North.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons.u116	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-27	May, Theresa Mary	Praise community trust criticize Labour	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-28-lords	My Lords, this is a disaster for the self-employed and owners of small businesses. On Sunday, Dominic Raab told anyone who risked losing money to look at their insurance, among other things. Since March, there has been a general market failure in the provision of cover for all pandemic risk, including business interruption. There is no insurance policy available that covers loss of income in these circumstances. The Government are aware of this and, in response to Written Questions, have undertaken to engage with the insurance sector on this issue “in due course”. “In due course” is already too late. Will the Government undertake to engage with the sector, which wants to talk to them about this, now?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-28-lords.u104	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-28	Browne, Desmond	Self-employed facing uninsurable risks	2020-07-28 00:00:00	2020-07-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons	There are over 42 frameworks—I have not studied them all in detail, but I am sure that those subjects will be covered. When we have frameworks, it is by consensus. It is up to each member state of the United Kingdom—the four nations—to adhere to those. They do have an opt-out and, as I say, the UKIM legislation underpins that and protects producers, suppliers, manufacturers and consumers alike.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons.u41	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-09	Jack, Alister William	Frameworks consensus among UK nations	2020-09-09 00:00:00	2020-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons	Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to take part in these proceedings tonight. As one of the final speakers in the debate, I have had the opportunity—or perhaps the misfortune—to sit patiently and listen closely to the arguments of the Secretary of State and her colleagues behind her on the Conservative Benches, and it is safe to say that I have rarely felt so disappointed or downhearted. I say that because we have heard Member after Member of this House rejoicing at the fact that they are going to end the ability of future generations to enjoy the same freedoms that we have all enjoyed to travel freely across the continent of Europe. Indeed, the Secretary of State listed all the constituencies where she believed that people voted for her Government in order to end free movement. Unsurprisingly, she did not mention a single Scottish constituency, probably because she has finally accepted that the people of Scotland do not support her Government’s actions on this key issue Beyond that, we have heard an almost celebratory tone in respect of bringing to an end what the Government refer to as low-skilled migration. Such dog-whistle politics is unbecoming at the best of times, but given the fact that we are in the midst of a global pandemic, it is simply unforgivable. After all, it is those very migrant workers, whom the UK Government class as low-skilled, who have helped to prevent the UK from grinding to a halt. They are the people who have been working on the frontline in our care homes and our hospitals as nurses, cleaners and porters, and the people who have been working in our supermarkets and food processing plants and on our agricultural land. The reality is that they are the glue that has helped to hold our society together. They may be paid less than they deserve, but they deserve our respect and our appreciation The damage of this attack on immigration will be felt for generations to come, particularly in Scotland. I say that because, as things stand, Scotland faces a demographic time bomb. Our pension-age population is growing, while our working-age population declines. There are two solutions to this issue. The first is for people to have more children, and quickly. The second and slightly easier solution is that we increase inward migration. On that front, we have been clear that EU nationals are wanted and welcome in Scotland. Indeed, we have actively sought to encourage people to make Scotland their home. Aside from the obvious social and cultural benefits that they bring to our nation, the reality is that the average EU national living in Scotland adds £10,400 to Government revenue and over £34,000 to GDP each year. They contribute far more than they will ever receive. It is for those reasons that the Scottish Government have sought proactively to engage with the UK Government on immigration to find a solution that meets the needs of Scotland. The clearest example of that was a proposal to introduce a Scottish visa, an additional route through which we could attract workers to Scotland. Such immigration variance has worked in Canada and Australia, yet the proposal was dismissed out of hand in less than 20 minutes. That should not necessarily come as a surprise, as it has been clear for a long time that the policies of this UK Government on immigration are not driven by a desire to meet the needs of Scotland. They are driven by the desire to play the role of little Englander, but the consequences of their actions will be great Locally here in Aberdeen, we are proud of our international outlook. There can be no doubt that workers from across the EU have had a key role to play in our economic success. One such success story is John Ross Jr, a company that processes and hand-prepares Scottish smoked salmon using traditional brick kilns. The company exports to over 30 countries and its staff are predominantly Polish, Latvian, Czech and Estonian. Its CEO is Christopher Leigh. On 27 February, he wrote to me about the importance of EU nationals to his company. He stated: “The reality is that if it were not for freedom of movement afforded by the European Union, John Ross would not be where it is today. ” He went on to say: “Closing the door on European workers now would be a case of the UK cutting its nose off to spite its face. It would also be disastrous for businesses, devastating for the communities in which they operate and catastrophic for the UK economy. ” “Catastrophic”. Just one word, but a word that should weigh heavily on the minds of the UK Government Ultimately—I think we can all agree on this point—the scale of the economic recovery facing all corners of the United Kingdom is going to be unprecedented. If we do not have an immigration system in place that attracts workers and meets the needs of businesses, we clearly run the risk of doing further harm. So I say to the UK Government: continue down this route and the people of Scotland will neither forgive nor forget.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons.u311	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-18	Flynn, Stephen Mark	Anti-immigration policy's Scottish impact	2020-05-18 00:00:00	2020-05-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-17-commons	I absolutely do. I was going to say, “Don’t talk to me about the work capability assessment, because it will get me very angry. ” We need reform of the welfare system to help to facilitate people returning to work, rather than just treating them as second-class citizens, as it often does.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-17-commons.u368	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-17	Lamb, Norman Peter	Reform welfare system for work	2019-01-17 00:00:00	2019-01-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons	I would be very happy to meet the hon. Lady. She has pointed out some of the terrible consequences of this horrific act, and I should like to take a little bit of time to refer to some of the others. In a leading judgment in the Supreme Court in a case concerning FGM, Lady Hale said that “these procedures are irreversible and their effects last a life time. They are usually performed by traditional practitioners using crude instruments and without anaesthetic. Immediate complications include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage, tetanus or sepsis, urine retention, ulceration…Long term consequences include…urinary incontinence…and sexual dysfunction…It is likely that the risks of maternal death and stillbirth are greatly increased” This is a horrific activity, and we must do everything we can to prevent it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons.u321	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Leigh (Frazer), Lucy Claire	Prevent FGM; atrocious consequences	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons	My hon. Friend is right to point out that claim forms can sometimes be difficult and onerous, for the elderly in particular. We deliberately designed the form after speaking to members of the Windrush generation, so that the language used was as simple and straightforward as possible. In addition, we made provision with Citizens Advice, so that it can assist people with their claims. Individuals from my hon. Friend’s constituency of Gloucester need only make contact with the helpline—I understand that the average wait time for an answer last week was just 18 seconds. His constituents should make contact with the helpline and they might then be referred to Citizens Advice, which will be able to provide assistance with making a claim.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons.u252	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-09	Nokes, Caroline Fiona Ellen	Claim form assistance available	2019-04-09 00:00:00	2019-04-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords	My Lords, let me say at the outset that I support much of what has been said already about further education colleges: they need significantly more support. I do so because many of my remarks are addressed at the university sector, particularly our research-intensive universities, and the effect that might possibly be had by the reduction of fees. The Science and Technology Committee, which I chair, is currently taking evidence on research funding of universities. The comments I will make arose during an evidence session in that context The Independent Panel Report to the Review of Post-18 Education and Funding in England has recommended reducing tuition fees. It is interesting that we call them “tuition fees”, which suggests the money is used for nothing but tuition. That, of course, is not the case, as those who run universities know well. Maybe, as the noble Lord, Lord Willetts, has suggested, we should call them “university fees”. The panel recommended reducing fees to £7,500 per year, with a broad recommendation for the Government to make up this money through direct teaching grants. However, there is no obligation for the Government to adopt all its recommendations. I hope that they will take that recommendation on board, but there is also no indication as to how these teaching grants will be distributed. I asked the noble Viscount the Minister a question the other day as to who would decide how this grant is distributed. There has been some suggestion in the evidence that we heard that there might be some kind of mechanism on a quality basis, which might be variable in the distribution of this grant As Professor Julia Buckingham, president-elect of Universities UK, said to the House of Lords Select Committee, it is vital that the Government ensure that any lost fee income is made up through grants, with a long-term Treasury commitment to fund universities at a sustainable level. Given the current political uncertainty, it is unclear how the next Prime Minister will view the report and whether the recommendations will be cherry picked. Any future Prime Minister and Government must commit to funding universities sustainably. Analysis by Universities UK finds that a reduction to £7,500 tuition fees would result in a £1.6 billion funding gap, which would need to be filled through direct grants. If this funding was not replaced, for many institutions this would reduce research income by between 10% and 60%, particularly for the research-intensive universities. For some it would result in the loss of their entire research budget The most up-to-date TRAC data published in May 2019 found that there is a £3.7 billion deficit for research in England and Northern Ireland, with recovery of full economic cost for research standing at 69%, because universities do not get full recovery of cost for certain grants as is the case for charities. This is subsidised substantially by non-publicly funded teaching, at 139.3% of full economic cost, and by other income-generating activities such as commercial activities, investments, donations and endowments, with publicly funded teaching broadly breaking even at 98.3% of full economic cost. So research universities do not use tuition fees as they are called, or student fees, for subsidising research; they have to find that money from other sources Given the sensitive balance of cross-subsidisation within higher education institutions between domestic teaching, non-domestic teaching and research, it is vital that the post-18 review does not lead to a cut in university funding, with any potential reduction in student fees being replaced through direct grants. Not only is this important to maintaining the quality of the UK’s world-class university sector and supporting work to widen participation for disadvantaged students, but failing to do so may lead to significant funding being diverted within institutions away from research activities. I do not say, as has been suggested, that universities would have to cut their outreach programmes for disadvantaged pupils. I do not think that we should harm universities that have saved money. For example, a fall in funding for domestic teaching might lead to additional international student income and income from other activities being used to plug the hole, and therefore being diverted away from supporting research activities. Anything that damages the reputation of the UK’s higher education sector would also pose a threat to international student recruitment, such as reports of institutional difficulties or even threats of closure, thereby compounding the task for UK Research and Innovation Universities use their reserves to fund construction and maintenance of buildings and the purchasing of new equipment. If these resources are increasingly stretched as a result of a cut to funding, universities will be less able to invest in the infrastructure that enables them to gain a competitive edge. For instance, these days to recruit a high-calibre senior academic to start a new research channel costs between £2 million and £3 million to universities. “Non-essential” but highly valuable functions of universities that do not draw in funding are the most likely to be cut. These include smaller research projects, such as those with a local or community focus, and work with smaller industry partners for whom high amounts of matched funding are not possible. Finally, although the Department for Education may want a reduction in the resources going into universities, at the same time BEIS wants to increase R&D from 2.4% to 3% of GDP, which would require 120,000 to 260,000 more graduates. They need not all be graduates, and the higher education colleges will have a significant role to play, but people will need to be taught STEM subjects to carry out the research and innovation—so a reduction in fees for the universities does have other implications. My plea to the Minister is that, in implementing the Augar review, the Government fund the universities as it recommended, so that they can continue as world-class research establishments.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords.u121	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Patel, Narendra Babubhai	Support universities fund research adequately	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-10-commons	T4. My constituency has one of the fastest-growing populations of any constituency in the country, partly because it is such a wonderful place to live, but police numbers, which are partly based on lagging population figures, have not kept pace. Will my hon. Friend tell me what the Government are doing to increase police numbers in Cambridgeshire?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-10-commons.u127	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-10	Browne, Anthony Howe	Cambridgeshire police numbers increase?	2020-02-10 00:00:00	2020-02-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons	One of the things that has happened in the past two years, of course, is the sharp fall in the sales of diesel vehicles. We are now looking at ways to continue the transition to low-carbon vehicles, moving away from diesel, which, for many years, and particularly under the last Government, was the No. 1 strategy for dealing with carbon. Of course we need to continue to clean up air, but under this Government we are introducing clean air zones around the country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons.u114	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-18	Grayling, Christopher Stephen	Transitioning from diesel to low-carbon	2019-07-18 00:00:00	2019-07-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons	First, I would like to pay tribute to the fabulous work of the council staff in my area and the local councillors of the Conservative party, independents and others, who work so hard to deliver excellent services for our community My right hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr Dunne) made the point that the previous Labour Government moved funding from shire constituencies to metropolitan areas. As a resident of both South Kesteven and Westminster, I thought it would be useful to illustrate the difference between the two. In South Kesteven District Council area, the average weekly gross wage is £453.20, and the council tax for a band D property is £1,589.38 a year. In Westminster, where I am during the week, the average weekly wage is £786.10, and band D council tax is £710.50. This means that the average person in Westminster is earning more than £300 a week more but pays £879 less in council tax for their local services Despite the challenges to funding and the fact that if Lincolnshire County Council was funded the same per capita as the average council in the country, it would receive £116 million more than its current budget of roughly £500 million, it has been able to do some very innovative things with its funding. We have discussed the environment a lot this week. South Kesteven District Council introduced “The Big Clean” initiative last year, which visits each village of the district to remove fly-tipping, clean signs, remove undergrowth and do other things suggested by the local residents to improve the environment in which people live and ensure that they can take pride in their surroundings Gravity Fields festival, which has been running since 2012, is an innovation of our local council. This goes beyond delivering the basic services; this is the best in the country. It is a festival of art and science inspired by Sir Isaac Newton, who was from Grantham and went to the local school. The festival not only provides the people of Grantham with information on art and science and very interesting experiences, but it raises £1 million for the local area through visitors staying there and spending their money on food and drink and the like. This is a Conservative council doing its best to deliver really innovative stuff, despite having a stretched budget North Kesteven District Council, which covers the other part of my constituency, is similar. It has looked carefully at the challenge of being good to the environment while providing the social housing that is required. It has won awards for building curved homes and passive houses, delivering the next generation of social housing in an environmentally sustainable way. It is not only providing basic services but going above and beyond, to provide excellent services. Lincolnshire County Council receives lower than the average per capita funding, as I have said, but it is still providing our children and young people with what Ofsted describes as “strong and effective” services for those with special educational needs and disabilities The ageing population presents one of our nation’s most profound challenges. It raises critical questions about how, as a society, we enable all adults to live well in later life and how we deliver sustainable public services to support them to do so. There will be 2 million more people aged over 75 in the next 10 years, and many of those will be managing long-term conditions. It is vital to make sure that local councils are supported to provide for elderly citizens so that they can age with dignity. That is why I am glad this Conservative Government have invested in social care, with a 23% increase in the improved better care fund to £1.8 billion, an additional £410 million through the social care support grant and £10 billion for adult social care being provided to councils by 2020. I really welcome the additional resources that have been provided for social care by this Government, but as a Member representing a rural constituency it is important for me to emphasise that an extra £1 for social care in London will go further than an extra £1 in Lincolnshire. Rural areas face higher costs for the delivery of public services than urban areas. [Interruption. ] The hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) says from a sedentary position, “That’s not true”, but if one is visiting an elderly person in their home and then travelling on to visit the next elderly person in their home, there is of course a gap.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons.u337	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-24	Johnson, Caroline Elizabeth	Council achievements despite funding challenges	2019-04-24 00:00:00	2019-04-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords	My Lords, I shall speak to Amendment 27. The consultation with the dairy industry highlighted a need to define how the codes of conduct will be enforced and how that enforcement will be financed. The dairy industry must be given a chance to provide views about enforcement. A range of options are possible. Arbitration or an ombudsman model are suggested. In either of these models, the cost must be considered. Legal advice and litigation costs will have to be considered. All such costs will ultimately fall on consumers. In this pandemic era, consumers must be considered. Families of lower income and those facing homelessness must be protected. Does the Minister agree that all such extra legal costs must not fall on consumers?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords.u137	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-15	Bhatia, Amirali	Dairy industry enforcement costs concern	2020-09-15 00:00:00	2020-09-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP		Non-affiliated	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	May I recommend to the Minister the RSC production of “As You Like It” that my brother is appearing in at Stratford-on-Avon As part of the preparations for leaving the EU, the EU has indicated that there will be an opportunity for reciprocal agreement for up to 90 days in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Given the importance of the EU for our performing artists, and for our world-leading musicians as well, can the Minister give us the strongest possible indication that the Government will honour that reciprocal deal with the EU—whoever ends up in charge?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u38	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Brennan, Kevin Denis	Arts Brexit deal request	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	I thank the Minister for that reply, and it is very welcome that money is going to electric buses and, indeed, ultra low emission buses, including hydrogen technology, but when I contacted my local bus company, National Express, it confirmed that the 29 vehicles already ordered are being built in Britain, but would not commit for future orders. It went on to express a hope that capacity would grow with demand—not just from it, but from other operators. Does the Minister agree that there is a real role for the Government here, and will he push for a whole of Government and industry approach to ensure that cash flowing into electric and low emission buses benefits bus builders in the United Kingdom, including Wrights in Ballymena?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u19	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Spellar, John Francis	Support UK bus industry	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Bill that we have just debated contains clauses inviting the Government to make progress towards the implementation of a “severely injured” pension for victims of the Troubles in Northern Ireland. There has been considerable distress in Northern Ireland because of concerns about the criteria, and a report has suggested that terrorists who went out to murder and maim and ended up injuring themselves may be eligible for such a pension. Unfortunately, we have not had an opportunity to debate those issues today owing to the nature of the proceedings. While I welcome the comments of Lord Duncan in the other place, may I ask whether there will be any opportunities—perhaps next week—for these matters to be aired, debated and hopefully answered in this House? I should be very much obliged.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons.u354	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-18	Little Pengelly, Emma	Requesting debate on pension criteria	2019-07-18 00:00:00	2019-07-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for introducing this statutory instrument. These coronavirus instruments are now becoming familiar on the Order Paper; each tells a story about people’s lives and gives lessons that are, perhaps, not yet all learned. As the Minister has said, Leicester was the first local area lockdown, and it is somewhat poignant that we are debating two regulations that are not all that old and include stepwise easing of local lockdowns at a time when we have just had to return to stronger measures for everyone Before getting to today’s statutory instruments, I will note that Leicester had its first statutory instrument before the summer break, followed by progressive lifting of measures and reductions in the area covered by the local measures. The paper trail from then—which is continuing—does show the regularity of fortnightly reviews and accompanying changes. I live some 85 miles from Leicester, so I am not local, but I did see news coverage and hear grumbling because local lockdowns always bring hard comparisons with freedoms just along, or just over, the road However, there were success stories too, especially with Leicester councils, for example, being early movers in using local tracing when the national system could not contact people. The lessons there have been followed elsewhere, but, sometimes, there still seems to be a centralising bias and a lack of information The first of the (No. 2) regulations that are the subject of this debate was actually the fifth set of changes, so a complete new regulation was made for clarity. Therefore, although it looks like it is imposing closures, those are mainly retaining previous measures, and it is actually allowing the opening up of bars, cafes and so on. It was subject to further review, resulting in the second of today’s Leicester SIs, opening up more businesses. There is then another amending SI on 15 September, which opens up the remaining businesses, as in the rest of England—although, overall, there are still more restrictions on personal socialising in Leicester than there are in England generally. The next review is tomorrow, I believe I do not want to guess or estimate whether Leicester is still worse off for infections than anywhere else, but I would not lay a bet against everywhere soon having more restrictions on household mixing. The ability to mingle with lots of different households in groups of six manages to be at the same time too restricting for family circles yet too permissive when used gregariously Others will make the future choices, but if the Government are to keep as much of the economy going as they can, it means ensuring that working parents with young children have sufficient childcare help, whether they work at home or go out. There has been a move in the right direction with linked childcare households but, in the face of another six months of restrictions and the season of illnesses, the provision that if you dissolve a linked childcare arrangement you cannot replace it with another is unrealistic. What about emergencies or illness? What if one arrangement can no longer function but another long-term substitute is available? Why not regularise what will have to happen in practice for both the individual and the national economy to survive?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-lords.u148	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-24	Bowles, Sharon	Leicester lockdown measures and adjustments	2020-09-24 00:00:00	2020-09-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-lords	My Lords, the Government recognise the significant challenge that the current pandemic poses to our arts sector and to the many individuals, including freelances, working across it. We are working very hard to help freelancers in those sectors access support, including through the self-employment income support scheme and funding from Arts Council England.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-lords.u4	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-15	Barran, Diana	Government support for arts sector	2020-12-15 00:00:00	2020-12-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons	I rise to speak in this important debate because this subject is so important to my constituents. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely) for securing the debate. It is so vital that we have this moment to discuss this issue and make sure that our constituents’ voices are heard Planning applications are probably some of the most difficult issues we deal with as MPs. The impact on residents of the suggestion of an inappropriate development or a speculative planning application causes so much stress and anxiety. I know that residents living on Moorland Road in Leek are absolutely beside themselves with fear at the moment about what a planning development could be like if it is given permission to be built just behind their homes, with inappropriate housing included in that development One of the things that has helped people cope with and live with planning is that it is the decision of local councillors, and that it is a matter for those locally elected representatives to make the decision. I, like the Minister, was so proud to be elected in 2010 on the premise, as was mentioned by my right hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), that we would have no top-down targets: we would get rid of the regional targets, we would get rid of central targets and we would let local people decide what housing needs there were in their areas. I have been absolutely thrilled to see neighbourhood plans being worked on in my constituency. I pay great tribute to Staffordshire Moorlands District Council for the years and years it has put into developing and finally agreeing, only in the last few weeks, a local plan. The local plan has local support, which will allow us to have the right housing mix in the right locations in the constituency How can it be the case that the Government are now considering any form of central target, because that is exactly what the algorithm looks like? I say to my right hon. Friend the Minister, who I know is a very good man and a constituency neighbour of mine—well, not a next door neighbour, but a fellow Staffordshire MP—that he should trust the good folk of Staffordshire to make the decisions and trust the good folk to elect the right people to make those decisions. He should take the measures that were suggested by my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Damian Green) to deal with land banking, which causes so much grief and anxiety, and please just stop this algorithm.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons.u281	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-08	Bradley, Karen Anne	Local planning decisions stress constituents	2020-10-08 00:00:00	2020-10-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-lords	My Lords, it is a great pleasure once again to follow the noble Lord, Lord Judd, who spoke with his typical wisdom. He is the conscience of our sub-committee, and we value him enormously. I declare my interests as set out in the register of the House, in particular those in respect of consumer financial services I will also begin by adding my tribute to our staff. The Justice Sub-Committee staff are especially hard-worked, because they are also the legal resource for the main Select Committee and all the other sub-committees as well. We have now published, as a whole structure, 38 unanimous reports, which are of a very high quality, and this report was no exception. I add my warm congratulations to our energetic chair, the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, who made an excellent speech. Writing a speech is like writing an essay, is it not? It is jolly hard to write a short one that is nice and clear, and hers certainly was clear and short Consumer protection has two main elements: efforts to protect the consumer before they buy the goods or services, and efforts to give the consumer access to remedies when things have gone wrong after they have bought them. I will confine myself to three important matters on which I ask the Minister for an update The first is about the European Committee for Standardisation—CEN—and its electrical sister, CENELEC. These bodies are not EU bodies but European bodies, and are well tried and tested committee structures that bring together the national standards for safety and quality in 34 countries today. The post-Brexit problem is set out in paragraphs 33 to 35 of our report and lies in the fact that CEN and CENELEC’s eligibility for membership is currently limited to, “an EU Member, an accession country or an EFTA country” The rules were not written with a Brexit in mind Witnesses told us, and we agreed, that it was vital that the UK got the eligibility criteria altered so that the UK retained its membership. At paragraph 41, we recommended that the Government support the British Standards Institute’s efforts to achieve British membership post Brexit. The Government’s response essentially said that that was the BSI’s problem alone, but that they would remain “in close contact” with it. I need hardly say that we found that disappointingly lukewarm and not at all in the spirit of the Government’s many commitments to maintaining consumer protection at the commendably high levels that the UK enjoys The White Paper on the future relationship did not cast any further light on the situation, nor did the political declaration, both documents being drafted at a rather higher level. I ask the Minister for an update on where we are with CEN and CENELEC My second point concerns the consumer protection co-operation regulation. The CPC regulation provides the mechanism for the exchange of information between national enforcement bodies, such as the CMA and, where necessary, empowers them to bring legal action to enforce consumer protection laws. Starting in 2016, the Commission sought to develop and modernise the CPC mechanisms for co-operation. Importantly, the new regulation, which has since emerged, encourages co-operation with non-EU member states At paragraph 75, we urged the Government to engage with that aspect. In their response, the Government said: “The UK has worked with the European Council to agree an ambitious new CPC regulation which strengthens cross-border cooperation and enforcement for the new digital environment. We are pleased that progress was made to agree this file by the end of 2017” That was all good news, and the new regulation will come into force in 2020, but did not answer our point at paragraph 75, which was that the Government should, “make every effort to engage the provision in the reformed Regulation … that encourages cooperation with non-EU Member States” There is no help in the political declaration on this matter, so can the Minister update us on whether the Government are planning to co-operate as a non-member state post Brexit, per the reformed CPC regulation and, assuming that that is the case, what they have done about it so far My final area of concern is the mutual recognition of judgments and civil justice co-operation generally. When things have gone wrong for a consumer, they need to be able to rely on the court system. This is highly important for consumers buying goods or services in the EU today, as others have observed. It helps to provide that vital confidence that underpins international trade, which in turn drives prosperity. Today, a British consumer can go to a British court with a problem, obtain a judgment and have it enforced in any EU country. I do not mind repeating that, because it is vital As I have already observed, the Government have often stated their commitment to consumer protection in the Brexit process. Indeed, they published their framework proposal on this area in June last year, and more detail was contained in the White Paper of July, which stated: “The UK is therefore keen to explore a new bilateral agreement with the EU, which would cover a coherent package of rules on jurisdiction, choice of jurisdiction, applicable law, and recognition and enforcement of judgements”, and that the UK will therefore seek to participate in the Lugano convention after exit However, in their paper Consumer Rights If There’s No Brexit Deal of October last year, the Government warned: “UK consumers will also no longer be able to use the UK courts effectively to seek redress from EU based traders, and if a UK court does make a judgement, the enforcement of that judgement will be more difficult as we will no longer be part of the EU. In addition, there will no longer be reciprocal obligations on the UK or EU Member States to investigate breaches of consumer laws or take forward enforcement actions. ” In the current situation, it is of course impossible to be sure where we will end up, or indeed when, but we can plan and take out at least some insurance that would help in several of the potential outcomes The Lugano convention concerns the recognition and enforcement of judgments and covers the EU, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland. Were we to leave the EU, early accession to that convention would certainly form part of the “coherent package of rules” mentioned in the White Paper, but importantly our accession to it would need the consent not just of the EU but of Switzerland, Norway and Iceland. Accordingly, making progress early is extremely important. I have asked some Written Questions of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Keen, who responded in October, saying that there had been some limited progress. I therefore close by asking the Minister to update us further on the Lugano convention position.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-lords.u126	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-16	Hay, Charles	Consumer protection post-Brexit update	2019-01-16 00:00:00	2019-01-16 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker, for calling me, for once, quite early on in proceedings and not “saving the good doctor” for tail-end Charlie. [Laughter. ] One of the disadvantages, it must be said, of having originally met you 15 years before we both entered the House in 1997, is the fact that you have, from time to time, felt it incumbent upon yourself to demonstrate that you were showing no particular favouritism to a personal friend by not calling me perhaps as early as I would have liked I was impressed that the shadow Leader of the House referred to our 10-year period training up Conservative activists—I think 600 in all—before we entered the House of Commons together in 1997. At that time, I used to do the campaigning part of the course and you used to do the oratorical part of the course. You used to say that in a good speech the speaker should have, at best, one key point and at most two key points to convey to the audience. So, my one key point about you, your character and your speakership is that you have shown that you are a good man to have by one’s side when the going gets rough. That does not just apply to individuals; it applied to Parliament as a whole, because when you came into office in 2009 the going was very rough indeed. You made your entry into Parliament in a somewhat dramatic way as the MP for Buckingham. Such were your skills as an orator during the selection process, you had been shortlisted for not only Buckingham but the Surrey Heath constituency. You were due to be in the semi-final in Surrey Heath and in the final in Buckingham on the same night. You will recall that, at my suggestion, we organised a helicopter to enable you to go from one interview to the other, so that you would not have to withdraw. I know that you have felt for many years a great deal of gratitude towards me for making that possible. I have to tell you that that gratitude was entirely misplaced, because I knew that only a few days later, the process of selecting for New Forest East was going to begin, and we were both on the longlist. [Laughter. ] I thought, “If I can’t get this blighter selected, I’m not going to have a chance,” so it worked out as a win-win situation It has often been remarked, and has been again today, that you went on a political journey, but the detail of that political journey has not always been spelt out as clearly as it should be. There is a myth out there that the young Bercow was part of the Monday club, had very right-wing views, and then saw the light and repudiated them all. It is with great pleasure, therefore, that I remind the House that on 2 December 1997, when we had both been elected and there was a Second Reading debate on the treaty of Amsterdam, I was making only my fourth speech from the Benches of the House of Commons and you—chuntering from a sedentary position—kept heckling me on why it was that I was such a johnny-come-lately to the cause of ardent Euroscepticism. Some people may wish that some journeys had been rather shorter than they turned out to be I will not detain the House much longer, other than to make a couple of closing points. I am still waiting for the dinner that I earned in a bet with a young female Conservative MP—now a Minister, I am delighted to say —when she made a bet with me that you would not last one year as Speaker without being ejected. And I observe that now, finally—at last—freed from the constraints of the speakership, you will feel able to speak your mind and not hold back your views so self-effacingly On a more serious note, but a heartfelt one, as well as thanking you for your personal friendship over many years, I am sure that you will agree that it would be nice to close this tribute to you with a personal tribute that I would like to make to the right hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Ann Clwyd). She has been here for 35 years, and in all that time, she has never ceased to promote human rights at home and abroad. From the opposite side of the Chamber, I salute her as I salute you, Mr Speaker.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons.u220	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-31	Lewis, Julian Murray	Speaker Bercow’s character and journey	2019-10-31 00:00:00	2019-10-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-15-lords	My Lords, I shall be relatively brief, for I have just one specific, though very important, issue to raise I have spoken on many occasions in this House about the urgent need for legal rights to be conferred on family members, particularly siblings, who choose to live together in adulthood, sharing their lives in committed, platonic relationships which in many cases endure until death. They remain scandalously unprotected by existing law, as the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, has also emphasised on many occasions Denied the option to form civil partnerships—though, contrary to widespread belief, there is nothing in the civil partnerships legislation to say that any sexual element is needed—they are denied all the rights that both married couples and civil partners enjoy. Yet cohabiting couples who are related by blood are no less likely to be either financially or emotionally interdependent than those whose union is sexual The hardships that must be borne by those who live together in a relationship based on family ties range from the denial of shared income tax allowances and pension rights to complications with passing on rented tenancies after the death of the first cohabitant and the denial of the spousal exemption from inheritance tax. Without the last of these, many cohabiting family members who bought their homes jointly decades ago, when property was comparatively cheap, face old age with the anxiety of knowing that they may be forced to sell the home, with all its much-loved associations, to raise inheritance tax when the first member of the couple dies Some of the provisions of the Bill before the House today—the right to have an insurable interest in the life of a partner, the right to succeed to a partner’s estate under intestacy rules, and so on—would be of the greatest value to cohabiting siblings and other family members who pair up, whether as companions through life or, as is frequently the case, as carers of an elderly relative. So I ask: why should they be excluded from this Bill simply because their relationship is platonic? Why single out for discrimination the only group of people left who have no access, through any means, to any legal rights and are crying out for them? Why assume that the only kind of relationship worthy of legal protection should be one based on sex, when two family members living together in adulthood in the way I have described so obviously represent a social good The Government are soon to extend the right to form civil partnerships to opposite- sex couples. Those who cohabit but are closely related by blood will, shamefully, continue to be excluded from all the attendant rights. Last month, during the passage of the Bill that will bring about the extension of civil partnerships, I said that committed, long-term cohabiting siblings look on with anger and astonishment as the Government continue to do nothing to relieve them of the constant anxieties they endure in the absence of joint legal rights This Bill, with its specific insistence that those within the prohibited degrees are to be excluded from its provisions, is inevitably a disappointment to cohabiting family members. It could have been a golden opportunity to put things in a better state for cohabiting family members, who deserve parliamentary and governmental action to remove the discrimination under which they have laboured for so long. I ask the noble Lord, Lord Marks, for whom I have high regard, to reconsider the exclusion of family members from the scope of the Bill.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-15-lords.u164	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-15	Cooke, Alastair	Legal rights for cohabiting siblings	2019-03-15 00:00:00	2019-03-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-lords	Have we got things quite straight about this week and next week? The Prime Minister has concluded that as things stand there is still insufficient support in the House to bring back the deal for a third meaningful vote, but she has also said that, “if the House does not approve the withdrawal agreement this week”— that is, the meaningful vote again— “our departure will instead be extended only to 11 pm on 12 April” So 12 April it is. Is that right?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-lords.u99	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-25	Howell, David Arthur Russell	Clarification on Brexit vote deadlines	2019-03-25 00:00:00	2019-03-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-commons	With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 2—Pensions Advisory Commission— “(1) The Pensions Regulator shall establish a committee to be known as the Pensions Advisory Commission (2) The Commission shall consist of— (a) members of the Regulator as provided under section 2(1) of the Pensions Act 2004, and (b) five other persons appointed by Her Majesty on the recommendation of the Secretary of State (3) A person appointed under subsection (2)(b) shall exercise only functions in pursuance of the duties in subsections (5) and (6) (4) The Commission shall be chaired by a person appointed under subsection (2)(b) (5) It shall be the duty of the Pensions Advisory Commission to submit to the Secretary of State each calendar year, beginning with the year 2022, a report setting out the Commission’s views on— (a) the impact of provisions in Parts 1, 2 and 4 of this Act on— (i) persons in different parts and regions of the United Kingdom, (ii) equal treatment of men and women in access to pension provision, and (iii) persons with a protected characteristic under section 4 of the Equality Act 2010; and (b) the effectiveness of the powers in Parts 1 to 3 of this Act in enabling the Pensions Regulator to achieve its objectives under section 5 of the Pensions Act 2004 (6) It shall also be the duty of the Commission to report to the Secretary of State by 31 October 2021 its views on when commercial operators should be able to enter the market for provision of a pensions dashboard service (7) The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a copy of every report received from the Commission under this section. ” New clause 3—Pension accounts— “(1) A jobholder to whom section 3 of the Pensions Act 2008 applies may by notice require an employer to arrange for the jobholder to receive into a pension account any contribution which would otherwise be made by the employer into an automatic enrolment scheme (2) A contribution by a jobholder or by their employer into the jobholder’s pension account shall be invested in a pension scheme offered by an approved pension provider. (3) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision— (a) about the form and content of a notice given under subsection (1), or (b) about the arrangements that the employer is required to make (4) The Secretary of State may make regulations to set criteria by which a pension provider may be approved for the purposes of subsection (2) (5) Regulations under this section shall be made by statutory instrument and may not be made unless a draft of the instrument has been laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament. ” New clause 4—Employer debt: trustees’ discretion— “(1) The following changes are made to the Occupational Pension Schemes (Employer Debt) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/678) (2) In regulation 2, in the definition of “scheme apportionment arrangement”— (a) in sub-paragraph (f)(ii), after “apply”, insert “but not if the circumstances in paragraph (h) apply”; (b) at end insert— “(h) the consent of the remaining employer or employers shall not be required under (f)(ii) above where all of the following conditions apply— (i) the departing employer’s debt was treated as becoming due prior to the coming into force of this provision; and (ii) the departing employer’s debt was less than 0.5% of the scheme’s overall liabilities, as estimated by the trustees or managers on advice of the scheme actuary, as if the whole scheme had been winding-up at the time the debt was treated as becoming due; and (iii) the employer in question was operating as an unincorporated business during his participation in the scheme; and (iv) the trustees or managers consider that, in the context of the scheme overall, taking into account factors such as the scheme’s assets, liabilities and the trustees’ or managers’ most recent assessment of the overall employer covenant, there would be no material benefit to the scheme and its members in seeking recovery of the employer’s liability share from the departing employer. ” (3) In regulation 9, after paragraph (14B), insert the following new paragraph— “(14C) Condition L is that a debt was treated as becoming due from him under section 75 of the 1995 Act but is excluded under this Condition because— (a) the employer’s debt was treated as becoming due prior to this Condition coming into force; and (b) the employer’s debt was less than 0.5% of the scheme’s overall liabilities, as estimated by the trustees or managers on advice of the scheme actuary, as if the whole scheme had been winding-up at the time the debt was treated as becoming due; and (c) the employer in question was operating as an unincorporated business during his participation in the scheme; and (d) at or before the applicable time, the trustees or managers have made a determination not to pursue the debt on the grounds that, in the context of the scheme overall, taking into account factors such as the scheme’s assets, liabilities and the trustees’ or managers’ most recent assessment of the overall employer covenant, seeking recovery represented a disproportionate cost to the scheme and would be of no material benefit to the scheme overall. ”” This new clause would enable pension scheme trustees to exercise discretion not to pursue employer debt following an employer’s exit from a pension scheme where such debt is below a de minimis threshold. This aims to support unincorporated employers who are now retired for business and for whom the current regulation allows no easements. New clause 5—Employer debt: deferred debt arrangement— “(1) The following changes are made to the Occupational Pension Schemes (Employer Debt) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/678) (2) In regulation 6F— (a) in paragraph (1), leave out “A” and insert “Subject to the provisions of paragraph (8) below, a”; (b) at end insert— “(8) In relation to a frozen scheme, the trustees or managers of the scheme may agree to a deferred debt arrangement where the employment-cessation event occurred at a time prior to the scheme becoming a frozen scheme, providing the conditions of paragraph (3) are met at the time the deferred debt arrangement is entered into. ”” This new clause would permit employers in a pension scheme closed to future accrual to apply for a deferred debt arrangement, providing they meet the other statutory tests. This aims to support employers who are still trading but were not able to use the existing deferred debt easement. New clause 6—Regulation of pension superfunds— “(1) The Secretary of State shall publish a statement on proposals for primary legislation in relation to a duty on the Pensions Regulator to regulate pension superfunds (2) For the purposes of this section, a pension superfund is a defined benefit pension scheme that allows for the severance of an employer’s liability towards a defined benefit scheme and one of the following conditions applies— (a) the scheme employer is replaced by a special purpose vehicle (SPV) employer, or (b) the liability of the employer to fund the scheme’s liabilities is replaced by an employer backed with a capital injection to a capital buffer (3) The statement under subsection (1) shall be laid before Parliament before the end of a period of six months from the day on which this Act receives Royal Assent. ” This new clause would require the Secretary of State to publish within six months of Royal Assent proposals for primary legislation to place a duty on the Pensions Regulator to regulate pension superfunds. Amendment 15, in clause 118, page 104, line 19, at end insert— “(3) Requirements prescribed under subsection (2) must include a requirement that a pensions dashboard service may not include a facility for engaging in financial transaction activities. ” This amendment ensures that a pensions dashboard does not include a provision for financial transaction activities. Amendment 9, page 105, line 20, at end insert— “(6A) A requirement under subsection (6)(d) may require the provider of a pensions dashboard service to ensure that the needs of people in vulnerable circumstances, including but not exclusively— (a) persons who suffer long-term sickness or disability, (b) carers, (c) persons on low incomes, and (d) recipients of benefits, are met and that resources are allocated in such a way as to allow specially trained advisers and guidance to be made available to them. ” This amendment would require that specially trained advisers and guidance are made available to people in vulnerable circumstances and would provide an indicative list of what vulnerable circumstances should include. Amendment 10, page 105, line 20, at end insert— “(6A) A requirement under subsection (6)(d) may require the provider of a pensions dashboard service to communicate to an individual using the dashboard the difference between— (a) provision of information, (b) provision of guidance, and (c) provision of advice. ” This amendment would require the provider of a pensions dashboard service to ensure that users are made aware of the differences between “information”, “guidance” and “advice”. Amendment 11, in clause 119, page 108, line 18, after “scheme,” insert— “(iva) the total cost of charges incurred for the administration of the scheme” This amendment would add information about the total cost of charges incurred for the administration and management of occupational pension schemes to the list of information displayed on the dashboard. Amendment 13, in clause 121, page 112, line 42, after “scheme,” insert— “(iva) the total cost of charges incurred for the administration of the scheme” This amendment would add information about the total cost of charges incurred for the administration and management of personal and stakeholder pension schemes to the list of information displayed on the dashboard. Amendment 8, in clause 122, page 116, line 37, at end insert— “(2A) Before any other pension dashboard services can qualify under section 238A of the Pensions Act 2004 (qualifying pensions dashboard service)— (a) the pensions dashboard service under subsection (1) must have been established for at least one year, and (b) the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a report on the operation and effectiveness of the pensions dashboard service under subsection (1) in its first year. ” Amendment 14, page 116, line 37, at end insert— “(3) Before any other pension dashboard services can qualify under section238A of the Pensions Act 2004 (qualifying pensions dashboard service) the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a report on the operation and effectiveness of the pensions dashboard service, including the adequacy of consumer protections. ” This amendment would require the Secretary of State to report on the operation and effectiveness of the public dashboard service (including consumer protections) before allowing commercial dashboards to operate. Amendment 7, in clause 123, page 117, line 34, at end insert— “(2) In exercising any powers to make regulations, or otherwise to prescribe any matter or principle, under Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004 (scheme funding) as amended by Schedule 10, the objectives of the Secretary of State must include ensuring that schemes that are expected to remain open to new members, either indefinitely or for a significant period of time, can adopt funding and investment strategies which are suited to the characteristics of such schemes. ” Amendment 1, page 117, line 34, at end insert— “(2) In exercising any powers to make regulations, or otherwise to prescribe any matter or principle, under Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004 (scheme funding) as amended by Schedule 10, the Secretary of State must ensure that— (a) schemes that are expected to remain open to new members, either indefinitely or for a significant period of time, are treated differently from schemes that are not; (b) scheme liquidity is balanced with scheme maturity; (c) there is a correlation between appropriate investment risk and scheme maturity; (d) affordability of contributions to employers is maintained; (e) affordability of contributions to members is maintained; (f) the closure of schemes that are expected to remain open to new members, either indefinitely or for a significant period of time, is not accelerated; and (g) trustees retain sufficient discretion to be able to comply with their duty to act in the best interests of their beneficiaries. ” This amendment seeks to ensure that open and active schemes which are receiving regular, significant cash contributions and closed schemes are treated differently, in accordance with their differing liquidity profile. Amendment 6, page 117, line 34, at end insert— “(2) The Secretary of State must, on or before 30 June 2021, lay before Parliament a comprehensive impact assessment of the effect on the charitable sector of changes to defined benefit schemes made under Schedule 10. ” This amendment would require the Government to produce an economic impact assessment of the changes to defined benefit schemes upon the charitable sector. Amendment 16, in clause 124, page 118, line 45, leave out subsection (8) and insert— “(8) In this section and in sections 41AA, 41B and 41C— (a) “the Paris Agreement goal” means the objectives set out in Articles 2 and 4.1 of the agreement done at Paris on 12 December 2015; and (b) “other climate change goal” means any climate change goal approved by the Secretary of State, but does not apply to a climate change goal which fails to meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement goal 41AA Alignment with the Paris Agreement goal (1) Trustees or managers of occupational pension schemes of a prescribed description must develop, set and implement, and from time to time review and if necessary revise, a strategy for ensuring that their investment policy, objectives and practices (including stewardship activities) are aligned with the Paris Agreement goal or other climate change goal (2) Such a strategy is to be known as a “Paris-alignment strategy” (3) The objective of a Paris-alignment strategy must be to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner, consistent with the Paris Agreement goal or other climate change goal (4) Provision may be made by regulations— (a) requiring the trustees or managers of a scheme, in determining or revising a Paris-alignment strategy, to take into account prescribed matters and follow prescribed principles— (i) as to the level of detail required in a Paris-alignment strategy; and (ii) as to the period within which a Paris-alignment strategy must be developed, set and effected; (b) requiring annual reporting on the implementation of the Paris-alignment strategy and progress against the objective set out in subsection (3); and (c) requiring a Paris-alignment strategy to be reviewed, and if necessary revised, at such intervals and on such occasions as may be prescribed. ” This amendment enables regulations that would mandate occupational pension schemes to develop a strategy for ensuring that their investments and stewardship activities are aligning with the Paris agreement goals, and include an objective of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner. Amendment 17, page 119, line 7, after “scheme” insert “and alignment with achieving the objectives of the Paris Agreement goal or other climate change goal” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 18, page 119, line 8, leave out “section 41A” and insert “sections 41A and 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 19, page 119, line 19, after “41A”, insert “, 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 20, page 119, line 21, after “41A”, insert “, 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 21, page 119, line 22, at end insert— “(za) provide for the Authority to undertake a review of, and report publicly on, the extent to which the activities under sections 41A and 41AA are achieving effective governance of climate change risk and alignment of pension schemes with the Paris Agreement goal;” This amendment enables the regulator to publicly assess the progress and development of schemes’ strategies to achieve alignment with Paris agreement goals. Amendment 22, page 119, line 25, after “41A”, insert “, 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 23, page 119, line 30, after “41A”, insert “, 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 24, page 119, line 37, after “41A”, insert “, 41AA” This amendment is consequent on Amendment 16. Amendment 2, in clause 125, page 120, line 32, at end insert— “(e) the results of due diligence undertaken by the trustees or managers regarding the intended transfer or the receiving scheme. ” This amendment enables regulations under inserted subsection (6ZA) of section 95 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 to prescribe conditions about the results of due diligence undertaken in relation to a transfer request such as to determine that the statutory right to a transfer is not established if specific “red flags” are identified in relation to the transfer or intended receiving pension scheme. Amendments 3, 4 and 5 are related. Amendment 3, page 121, line 27, at end insert— “(e) the results of due diligence undertaken by the trustees or managers regarding the intended transfer or the receiving scheme. ” This amendment enables regulations under inserted subsection (5A) of section 101F of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 to prescribe conditions about the results of due diligence undertaken in relation to a transfer request such as to determine that the statutory right to a transfer is not established if specific “red flags” are identified in relation to the transfer or intended receiving pension scheme. Amendments 2, 4 and 5 are related. Amendment 12, in schedule 9, page 178, line 14, after “scheme,” insert— (iva) the total cost of charges incurred for the administration of the scheme”. This amendment would add information about the total cost of charges incurred for the administration and management of occupational pension schemes in Northern Ireland to the list of information displayed on the dashboard. Amendment 4, in schedule 11, page 192, line 20, at end insert— “(e) the results of due diligence undertaken by the trustees or managers regarding the intended transfer or the receiving scheme. ” This amendment enables regulations under inserted subsection (6ZA) of section 91 of the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993 to prescribe conditions about the results of due diligence undertaken in relation to a transfer request such as to determine that the statutory right to a transfer is not established if specific “red flags” are identified in relation to the transfer or intended receiving pension scheme. Amendments 2, 3 and 5 are related. Amendment 5, page 193, line 15, at end insert— “(e) the results of due diligence undertaken by the trustees or managers regarding the intended transfer or the receiving scheme. ” This amendment enables regulations under inserted subsection (5A) of section 97F of the Pension Schemes (Northern Ireland) Act 1993 to prescribe conditions about the results of due diligence undertaken in relation to a transfer request such as to determine that the statutory right to a transfer is not established if specific “red flags” are identified in relation to the transfer or intended receiving pension scheme. Amendments 2, 3 and 4 are related.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-commons.u236	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-16	Winterton, Rosalie	Pension reforms, advisory commission, dashboard, regulations	2020-11-16 00:00:00	2020-11-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	I will look at that idea and discuss it with the NHS. The training programme that we are putting in place is intended to raise awareness of the evidence and the change in rules among the profession—among doctors and the specialist prescribing doctors on the register. Ultimately, it is only with clinical sign-off that we allow any drug to be prescribed. That is where the training needs to be in the first instance, but I will look at the hon. Lady’s suggestion of doing it more broadly.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u229	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Hancock, Matthew John David	Discussing NHS training program	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons	Many of my constituents who had their flights cancelled are facing considerable financial hardship as they are yet to see any refund for these flights or for hastily arranged alternative flights that were also cancelled. So will the Secretary of State guarantee that those whose flights have been cancelled will be refunded and that the Government will step in to make sure that this is the case?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons.u86	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-11	Hussain, Imran	Refunds for cancelled flights requested	2020-05-11 00:00:00	2020-05-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-lords	My Lords, I declare my interest as co-chair of Peers for the Planet. I very much welcome the emphasis in the Statement on green recovery and the ambition to lead the world in green finance. I have a couple of questions on TCFD and the decision to mandate climate disclosures. Could the Government not be a little bit more ambitious on the 2025 deadline, given the number of companies that are already taking on these responsibilities and have acted on disclosure? In the run-up to COP 26, will the Government take this as an exemplar and persuade other countries to act in a similar fashion so that we can have an even playing field across countries?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-lords.u194	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-11	Hayman, Helene Valerie	Green recovery ambition climate disclosures	2020-11-11 00:00:00	2020-11-11 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-commons	The answer to her question is yes. There is no room for complacency. That investigation led to a whole swath of measures to make sure that nothing like this could ever happen again to parents and that the law would indeed be on their side when similar events occurred in the future. That, I think, is something in which the Minister will take an interest The investigation, the Infant Cremation Commission report, and the report of the National Cremation Investigation led to positive change. Now, in almost every circumstance, parents should receive the ashes from their baby’s cremation. A code of practice has been established by a national committee on infant cremation, setting out key principles and minimum standards for all organisations conducting infant cremations In March 2015, the Scottish Government announced the appointment of an inspector of crematoriums for Scotland to ensure that all crematoriums were adhering to the current legislation and best practice following the national investigation into circumstances surrounding historical infant cremation practices in Scotland. A criminal sanction was introduced to prohibit the cremation of a foetus, a stillborn baby, or an infant with an unrelated person. Indeed, legislation was brought forward to overhaul policy and practice in the burial and cremation sector, with improved staff training We also know that, until fairly recently, the parents of stillborn children were never told where or how their baby had been buried. To us today, that seems almost too cruel to be true and utterly beyond comprehension. I had a stillbirth at full term, and I cannot imagine a situation in which my baby would have been removed from me with no information about how or where he was buried. For the parents affected, that must have made the grieving process much more difficult and much more traumatic. We know that some parents who endured this decades ago can perhaps trace their babies’ graves now, but it is something that they should never have to do. It is probably worse if those parents who seek to trace their child’s remains simply cannot find where they are. Imagine the years passing and the questions growing in their head about where their baby is. I can scarcely believe the attitudes of the recent past that thought this was an appropriate way to deal with the lost babies and grieving parents and families We know that some of the babies were buried with other babies, or sometimes with other random adults who had recently died in hospital. Parents trying to trace the burial place of their babies years later are therefore not always successful, which simply adds to the torture and pain despite the passing of years. What is clear is that everything that can be done must be done to assist the parents looking for their lost babies These parents were not usually informed that their babies’ loss was officially documented and that they could obtain a certification of the baby’s stillbirth. Such certification can bring some comfort because it is an acknowledgement—a recognition—that their baby existed. Most had not even known that they could name their baby. Patients in all circumstances were kept in the dark for their own protection. It was assumed that if a mother or father were allowed to see their stillborn baby and establish any kind of connection, it would only prolong their grief, but, of course, we know that parents are committed and connected to their children long before their birth—perhaps at the point of conception, or perhaps even earlier, when they imagine themselves as parents for the first time. We recognise that to lose a baby at any point in pregnancy can be profoundly traumatic Today, parents are encouraged to see, hold or even dress their stillborn baby if they choose to do so. They can take photographs, handprints, footprints, and a lock of hair. They are encouraged to collect mementos of their baby and grieve for them, as any parent would grieve for a child, no matter how long their life was. To know that so many couples and families have been denied that chance is heartbreaking and, frankly, difficult to comprehend. Parents who lost babies decades ago still speak of the terrible guilt that they feel about not knowing anything about what happened to their baby, or where they are buried. Sadly, though, they had very little choice in these matters, as, still in the fresh bewilderment of their grief, their babies were simply taken from them and nothing more was said. It is hard to believe that, in the ‘60s and ‘70s, this was, if not mandatory, certainly extremely commonplace, and it sounds as though it was something that would have happened hundreds of years ago Thankfully, we are more informed and more enlightened about these matters now. I hope that the relevant authorities in all parts of the UK will do all they can, and continue to do all they can, to help such affected parents to find out where their babies are and give them the support that they need. I know that Sands has done some excellent work in this area. Finding a baby’s resting place will surely provide some peace for many of the bereaved parents and their families—peace that is much needed and to which these parents and their wider family members are entitled Thankfully, we all now recognise what a huge and traumatic event it is to have a baby that is stillborn and how it casts a lifelong shadow over parents and wider family members as they cope with the absent presence of a child. Whether we are talking about cremation practices or burials, all parents must be given respect and their babies must be given the dignity of a burial or cremation that involves their families and provides a ritual that can be so important when grappling with overwhelming grief We are doing things better, but we must not be complacent on this issue, which is hugely significant for the families and parents left behind. It is right that this important debate has taken place, and I again applaud the hon. Member for Swansea East for securing it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-commons.u307	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-06	Gibson, Patricia	Infant cremation reform and support	2020-02-06 00:00:00	2020-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	I thank the right hon. Member for that intervention. I think most of us are concerned in our constituencies to ensure that we have enough people to help out, but do not have the wrong sort of people getting involved. We do not want to start seeing scams and people defrauded, because that would be a terrible way to proceed We need to look at how far we can stretch the idea that volunteers can help in health and social care, because in certain situations—for example, an elderly person with very poor skin condition, with sores, who needed particular lifting, or somebody who was PEG-fed, using percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy—we cannot even use DBS-checked volunteers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u200	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Keeley, Barbara Mary	Volunteer limits in health care	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	There is a crisis of species decline in this country. While we can all see the virtues of operations like rewilding and species introduction, it is in the farmed environment where we will turn it around. Will my right hon. Friend assure us that in the Agriculture Bill and in Government policy, there will be a drive towards the right incentives to protect species and reverse the decline in biodiversity?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u28	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	Benyon, Richard	Incentives to protect biodiversity	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	My hon. Friend is a very well respected criminal barrister and has done a great amount of work here as a member of the Justice Committee. He is absolutely right to highlight the incredible work that lawyers undertake for free, which does go unrecognised. He is also right to highlight the Manchester attack. We are in the anniversary week of that terrible tragedy and my thoughts are with all those who have suffered. The Manchester Law Society did a call for support and over 100 firms and barristers offered free advice and representation.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u106	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Leigh (Frazer), Lucy Claire	Commending lawyers' pro bono work	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-23-lords	My Lords, the noble Lord kindly mentioned the need for other voices from other countries, but there is also a very strong economic case for diversity and inclusion. Certainly, many global companies have adopted very positive policies on inclusion and diversity. Can he tell us what the FCO is doing to raise this issue with other departments, particularly those responsible for trade, to ensure that trade envoys and others make a positive case for diversity and inclusion so that we encourage investment and a change in the law?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-23-lords.u31	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-23	Collins, Raymond	Promote diversity in trade policies	2019-07-23 00:00:00	2019-07-23 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons	With Combermere barracks and Victoria barracks in the Windsor constituency, we are proud to be home to the Irish Guards, the Welsh Guards and the Household Cavalry. Following their many years of service to our nation, I want them to feel safe and secure in the knowledge that they will not be hounded and harassed by vexatious litigation for decades to come. How soon will our veterans be able to stand at ease?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons.u6	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-03	Afriyie, Adam	Veterans' protection from litigation	2020-02-03 00:00:00	2020-02-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons	Of course, in addition to the billions that we have invested—including £19 billion in coronavirus business interruption loans to small and medium-sized enterprises and £38 billion in bounce back loans, all of which are still available—we are making cash grants of up to £3,000 for businesses, such as those in Merseyside, that have been forced to close as a result of local lockdowns.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons.u327	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-12	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Financial aid for businesses	2020-10-12 00:00:00	2020-10-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-lords	My Lords, I certainly agree that we cannot end FGM in the UK without tackling it globally. That is why we are supporting the Africa-led movement to end FGM and why we are supporting activists and organisations here in the UK. We have made some good progress here in the UK: we have introduced several protection orders and mandatory reporting for girls. That is all working to help to break the cycle of FGM for good.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-lords.u46	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-06	Sugg, Elizabeth	Support for global FGM eradication	2020-02-06 00:00:00	2020-02-06 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-05-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating that Statement. I want to record our thanks to each member of staff working on the DWP front line for all they are doing during this crisis to process the unprecedented volume of claims that have been made I want to say at the outset how much we welcome each of the steps that the Government have taken to improve the welfare state to deal with this crisis, but the social security system that we had going into the crisis was a safety net with holes in it. I am glad that the Government have recognised the need to start shoring some of those up Labour has five proposals to enable the social security system better to respond to the crisis. The first is to increase legacy benefits. The Government have increased universal credit by £20 a week for this year, but those on legacy benefits such as JSA or ESA do not get that increase. More than 100 charities point out that this discriminates against disabled people. Can the Minister explain that The second proposal is to suspend the benefit cap. The House of Commons Library estimates that at least 18,000 extra families in Great Britain could be hit by the cap as a result of the increase in UC and housing help. That would take the total number of families affected this year to over 100,000. The cap affects not just big families; half of those 18,000 families have only one or two dependent children. More often, it is the high cost of housing. Ministers normally say, “You can escape the benefit cap by getting a job, working more hours or moving to cheaper housing”, but all those are impossible during this crisis. No wonder so many bodies, from the IFS to CPAG, are calling for the cap to be suspended. Will the Government do that now? Thirdly, suspend the savings limit in universal credit. Anyone with savings of over £16,000 is banned from claiming UC altogether. That does not happen in tax credits, where the means test simply takes account of any income from savings. Why should someone who has put money aside for a housing deposit or is saving for a substantial item be completely frozen out of universal credit? They paid into the system when they were able to work, so should it not be there for them now? Will Ministers review those savings limits I have a brief question. Can the Minister tell me whether this would affect someone who is self-employed and who had a viable business that has collapsed since the Covid crisis? The Government have put back the date for paying tax. If you have that money sitting in your bank account, would it be treated as savings income and thus stop you getting universal credit Fourthly, remove the two-child limit. Ministers argued for this policy on the grounds that those who receive social security benefits should have to make the same family choices as those who do not. That was always a deeply flawed argument, but this crisis shows the absurdity of it. Some 2 million people have applied for benefits over the past few weeks. Do we really think that when, three years ago, some of them decided to have another child, they could possibly have imagined that a global pandemic would virtually shut down our economy? The policy is pushing ever more children deeper into poverty, so will Ministers please think about it again Fifthly, end the five-week wait for universal credit. I know that I go on about this a lot, but it is simply wrong that people have to wait five weeks for their money, or else they take a loan that will be deducted from future payments that will leave them with less to live on each month than the basic universal credit amount. That five-week wait has been the single biggest driver of housing arrears, short-term debt and food bank usage, so will Ministers act now either to end it or give grants instead of loans I want now to ask some specific questions. First, given that the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, is standing in for the Minister, I recognise that she may need to write to me in response to some of them. However, I would really appreciate some specific answers. First, she mentioned that the Government have now allowed maternity and adoption pay and maternity allowance to be calculated on salary rather than on furlough pay, which may be lower. Will they now backdate payments to women who have already had their payments calculated on their furlough pay rather than their full salary Secondly, universal credit disregards statutory maternity pay when it applies to the work allowance, but it does not do that for maternity allowance, which is the benefit paid to many low-income women. This means that a low-paid pregnant woman could be as much as £4,000 a year worse off. Will the Minister correct this The Minister went on to mention how people are struggling to get through to the DWP on the phone. She talked about the “Don’t call us, we’ll call you” approach? Can she explain that? If I want to call the DWP and I cannot get through, can I leave a message and will someone call me back? If so, on average how long will it take—or is it simply that the department will call me only if it wants information? People need help in the first place, and they ought to be able to get through This crisis has revealed two things. It has shown how unjust and unequal our labour market is, and it has also shown how our basic welfare state has been quite significantly eroded in recent years The Secretary of State told the Commons yesterday that universal credit was only there to help the poorest in society. I do not think that it is giving enough help to them. Our welfare state is meant to provide a safety net to support any of us who are hit by a crisis. Like the NHS, it is a means of pooling our risk because we do not know who will be affected by disability, unemployment or bereavement, or indeed by a virus. How many of the millions of people who have claimed universal credit of late ever thought that they would need help from the welfare state? We all know of people who have been paying in all their lives expressing shock at how low SSP is and how low benefits are, probably because they have heard Ministers claim for so long that the benefits system is far too generous—even though we know how really ungenerous it is for many people As the Government plan for the recovery and not just the immediate response, is the department looking at all of the recent learning and thinking about how best to use the system to address the inequality, poverty and insecurity which have been revealed by this crisis? I look forward to the Minister’s reply.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-05-lords.u157	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-05	Sherlock, Maeve Christina Mary	Improve social security during crisis	2020-05-05 00:00:00	2020-05-05 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons	The hon. Lady will know the guarantees in place in relation to structural funds currently provided by the EU, but clearly we want new arrangements in place through the UK shared prosperity fund. We will come forward with the details of that fund, and the spending review will set out the monetary aspects.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons.u21	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-04	Brokenshire, James Peter	UK shared prosperity fund plans	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons	The Secretary of State is sitting here, so I do not need to pass that on. It is certainly important that young people are leading the way, and I think that many of us are perhaps slightly embarrassed that we have been so slow off the mark. Going back to what my hon. Friend the Member for Corby (Tom Pursglove) said, it is important that young people should be aware of how their food is produced and where it comes from and of the seasonality in this country so that they can understand when different foods are in season. If they buy foods that are in season, they will be able to reduce the carbon footprint of the food they purchase.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-commons.u40	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-09	Goodwill, Robert	Support young people's food education	2019-05-09 00:00:00	2019-05-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-commons	Britain can be proud of its global record of development. Will the Minister encourage some other European countries to step up and match Britain’s international aid commitment? Countries including France and many others only contribute about half the national wealth that this country does, and they can learn a lot from global Britain.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-commons.u272	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-15	Smith, Henry Edward Millar	Praise UK aid, urge others	2019-10-15 00:00:00	2019-10-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-commons	Hanwell health centre, which works hard to serve many of my constituents, has told me that it has been trying to appoint a salaried GP for three years, as well as a large number of nurses. There is generally a four-week wait for an appointment, although the centre has provided 75 more appointments to cope with demand. Under the Secretary of State’s plans, when will those waiting times come down?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-commons.u22	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-28	Murray, James Stewart	Healthcare staffing and wait times	2020-01-28 00:00:00	2020-01-28 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords	My Lords, I wish to make two brief points relating to Northern Ireland and Ireland Northern Ireland has, of course, been central to the Brexit negotiations since the referendum in 2016, and as an adviser at the Northern Ireland Office I was involved in many discussions on those matters. Yet during my time I became dismayed at how much the European Commission seemed to view Northern Ireland almost exclusively through the green-tinged lenses of the Irish Government and nationalist politicians. Indeed, at a meeting I attended with Monsieur Barnier in June 2018, I found myself calmly having to explain to him what was actually meant by the consent provisions in the Belfast agreement and why they did not turn Northern Ireland into a hybrid state. It was I, regret to say, a meeting that might have turned even the noble Lords, Lord Hannay and Lord Kerr, into rabid Brexiteers I do not wish to denigrate the excellent efforts of our officials in Brussels, but whenever there was a difference of nuance between us and the Irish on Northern Ireland or the agreement, the Commission invariably tended towards the Irish view. Outside the EU, attention therefore needs to be given to how the UK Government, as the sovereign Government in Northern Ireland, can communicate their position much more effectively with the European Commission Secondly, as we move beyond Brexit, our relationship with our nearest neighbour, Ireland, becomes more important than ever. Our bilateral relationship has improved massively in recent years, which I warmly welcome, and it needs to be strengthened further. Strand 3 of the Belfast agreement contains institutions—the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference and the British-Irish Council—designed to promote closer co-operation, although the BIIGC tends to focus more on Northern Ireland. We need to look at how these institutions can be developed or at whether new and bespoke ones are needed. I have an open mind on that, but as we move beyond Brexit, it needs to happen.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords.u167	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Caine, Jonathan	Northern Ireland Brexit EU bias	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	Harrogate and Knaresborough is in the top 10% of UK constituencies for hospitality employment. That includes a significant number of teams at B&Bs and guest houses, which are suffering from a lack of international visitors and the closure of the exhibition sector. There is a market that could be developed further to help, and that is domestic tourism. As we emerge from the pandemic and lockdown finishes, what will the Government do to promote domestic tourism?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u4	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Jones, Andrew Hanson	Promote domestic tourism post-pandemic	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons	Will the Foreign Secretary consider the early-day motion tabled by 25 parliamentarians today calling on our Government to seek agreement with other Commonwealth countries to offer Hong Kong citizens second citizenship and a place of abode? Could this be applied for as an agenda item at the next Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons.u128	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Bruce, Fiona Claire	Hong Kong citizenship plea question	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-23-lords	My Lords, “Adult social care in England is inadequately funded. ” That is the opening line of a strong report from the House of Lords Economic Affairs Select Committee, of which I am a member. Right now, that strained system is dealing with a virus that strikes at vulnerability, the very heart of care services. The Government’s response seems to have inadequate intelligence about how care work operates. How else could the “care homes not at risk” advice have come about, or low-paid care workers be expected to travel more than 200 miles for a test The virus shows how much we rely on workers in essential services. Care workers rank highly among them in terms of both society’s need and the risks the workers face. The NHS has high recognition, equipment, donations and worker visa extensions, and the care sector deserves the same. It is time to level up. Just like the NHS, care needs could affect anyone. Half the adult care budget goes on working-age adults, and that percentage is rising Many care provider businesses are now financially at risk, including some employee-owned and mutual businesses. I am told that some local authorities rapidly made three-month forward bookings and advanced payments, taking the financial risk if those places are not used, to help providers keep afloat for the future. Local authorities have suffered from lacking and late information in a situation that has moved faster on the ground than government decisions. New funding is welcome, but it lags behind the progress of the virus in terms of rising operational and care costs and loss of income from rates, rent and car parks. The knock-on effect of the virus will take a higher toll on the vulnerable, including the working vulnerable, which translates in the long term to a need for more care The rulebook on government expenditure has been torn up to support many people and businesses during lockdown. An equally open mind and a long-term approach are needed post coronavirus. Investment for growth must trump austerity, and social care underfunding must still be addressed. One good-faith way in which the Government could start right now would be to put care providers on the same VAT footing as the NHS. Be innovative—it can be done if the will is there.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-23-lords.u135	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-23	Bowles, Sharon	Social care underfunded needs parity	2020-04-23 00:00:00	2020-04-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords	My Lords, this has been a thought-provoking discussion. I am often guided by my own beliefs and I recognise Ecclesiastes chapter 4, verses 9 to 10: “Two are better than one … for if they fall, one will lift up the other” I am heartened by the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, because I do not doubt that he will be working closely with Conor McGinn from the other place to ensure that what comes to this House carries with it the exact protections and care that we have seen in England and Wales and in Scotland. There are elements which need to be recognised in terms of the wider question of freedom of religion and freedom of expression, and I hope to see those protections coming through in an emerging amendment. As I said, the amendment from the other place has certain deficiencies and we hope to see those improved through the work which I do not doubt the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, among others, will help move forward It is important, again, that we balance rights, obligations and protections throughout, not least in schools, and we must make sure that we are teaching the reality of what is going on. We need to make sure that pupils understand the wider question of relationships before they ever engage in sex education. I draw a distinction between relationships and sexual elements; I think they need to be seen in that context. It is important to remember that these issues have been addressed previously in different parts of the United Kingdom. These are not new issues. The concerns of particular bodies are not new and on each occasion I believe that the different authorities, whether in Scotland or in England and Wales, have learned from the challenges and have ensured that the protections which they have put together are adequate to address the concerns raised by noble Lords I appreciate the concerns which noble Lords have expressed. They are right to recognise that there is throughout Northern Ireland and elsewhere a particular constituency which sees the faith-based approach to marriage as an integral part of it. I do not doubt the validity of that or the importance of recognising why that must be accepted and trusted, but at the same time the wider context needs to be considered. I hope the amendment we see coming forward addresses these issues. On that basis, we hope that this amendment can be withdrawn. My final point is: congratulations to the noble Baroness, Lady Barker.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords.u246	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-15	Duncan, Ian	Amendment balance, protections, relationships, recognition	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Liaison Committee has still not been set up because there were objections to the Leader of the House’s proposal to create a new piece of prime ministerial patronage, putting someone in place as Chair rather than having them elected by the House. I wonder, Mr Speaker, whether there has been any indication that that motion could be brought back by the Leader of the House at any stage without the position of Chair being included.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons.u209	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-25	Brennan, Kevin Denis	Liaison Committee Chair controversy	2020-03-25 00:00:00	2020-03-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords	My Lords, the noble Lord raises a very difficult issue. Many of us will have seen footage of the situation for many families when outside support was removed during the period of lockdown: it is incredibly moving, as well as incredibly distressing. The Government have tried to support families with children with additional disabilities—obviously, with a school place, if that was appropriate, and with more funds being given to the family fund. I will, of course, write as the noble Lord requests when I have received the report he mentions, and, as I say, I will draw it to the attention of Dr Emran Mian, who is doing the wider work on disparities and Covid.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-27-lords.u227	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-27	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Support for families with disabilities	2020-10-27 00:00:00	2020-10-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-commons	Let me first declare an interest as an associate of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators I thought for a moment that I was going to welcome the agreement that there clearly is between my hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Mr Djanogly) and me, but, given his last comments, I am not sure any more—I need to think about them. However, I think we are on the same sort of page at the moment I, too, welcome these Lords amendments and point out that they are a very good compromise between this House and the other place. I also welcome what the Minister has said in bringing them forward. In taking away the criminality, having a sunset clause and bringing in a consultation, they have done a tremendous amount to bridge the gap that there previously was during our discussions on this Bill. But in fundamental essence, the Bill remains the same in what it can do, and I am glad that it does I made the point on Report as to why that was important. I am not going to repeat the entire speech that I made then—I probably could not get away with that—but I stressed the need for agility and flexibility, and I put that in the context of the Singapore mediation convention. There is a great necessity to get the Singapore mediation convention into working order and on the statute book. The reason for that is twofold First, it fundamentally does no harm whatsoever—in fact, it does a tremendous amount of good for the small businesses that are choosing mediation as a means of settling their disputes. Secondly, it ends the farce we have at the moment with the system that is in place whereby if one has a mediation, one then has to agree an arbitration, however short that may be, in order to take advantage of the New York convention. That is a nonsense that we do not want to continue with. We must implement the Singapore mediation convention, which allows the results of a mediation to be recognised in the countries that have signed up to this The Minister was kind enough to say that I am a great champion of the Singapore mediation convention, and he is quite right, because I have seen that it does a tremendous amount of good for this country. It is also because, as the hon. Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham) said, a tremendous amount of alternative dispute resolution takes place in this country. We are world leaders in this, but we will not remain so for very long unless we sign up to the Singapore mediation convention and get stuck into what the rest of the world is getting involved in. All I can do is recommend to the Minister that he gets on with introducing the statutory instrument to get the Singapore mediation convention up and running in this country. To repeat what I said on Third Reading, I am very happy to serve on the SI Committee that introduces the Singapore mediation convention and to see a great dream come true.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-commons.u248	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-24	Howell, John Michael	Support Singapore mediation convention implementation	2020-11-24 00:00:00	2020-11-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons	Our veterans have given so much in the service of this country and it is vital that we ensure that not a single one ends up on the streets. Will the Minister therefore reassure me and my constituents who care deeply about this that veterans continue to have priority need to keep them off the streets and that the funding provided by this Government means that if someone finds themselves in hard times this winter, local authorities have not only the duty, but the resources to give them the home that they deserve?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons.u152	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-11	Higginbotham, Antony	Support for homeless veterans	2020-11-11 00:00:00	2020-11-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons	My hon. Friend is making some incredibly powerful points. He is undoubtedly aware that today the world is celebrating the 75th anniversary of the United Nations. Does he find it curious that the UK Government have signed up to a statement that says: “We will abide by international law… We will abide by the international agreements we have entered into and the commitments we have made” Is there not some stark hypocrisy going on there?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons.u383	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-21	Doughty, Stephen John	UK hypocrisy on international law	2020-09-21 00:00:00	2020-09-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-14-lords	My Lords, democracy did not start and finish on 23 June 2016. For those who say we must at all costs respect the result of the referendum, does that mean that whatever the deal, whatever Prime Minister Theresa May or some other Prime Minister might come up with, we have to go through with it, however unpopular that agreement is to both the remainers and those who support Brexit—and, indeed, however misleading, manipulative and incorrect the claims of the leave campaign? Does it mean that one referendum binds us for ever more on an issue? Do we not have a parliamentary, representative democracy? Do our MPs not count? This Government, in this 21st century UK democracy, say that only one vote counted—in June 2016. A new referendum on a new issue—the acceptability of the EU deal currently offered by the Government—is now said to be anti-democratic and a betrayal as it does not respect the decision taken in the summer of 2016 I am a Liberal Democrat, and it has to be said that we often encourage referendums. But I tell your Lordships this: I do not have any great enthusiasm for referendums. I never have had. That has been emphasised by my position as a Scottish Liberal Democrat. Generally, I would support them only to give authority—the authority of the people of this country—to a major constitutional change that the Government of the day want to implement. I do not much like them being used to test the waters when a Government or party are unclear or divided. I do not like their consequences when the result is desperately close: 51.9% to 48.1% is desperately close and has left a nation very divided. With the Scottish referendum on independence, 55.3% versus 44.7% felt very divisive and very close In the current circumstances, a second referendum, a people’s vote, a new referendum on a different question on the detail of the deal, is entirely legitimate. Remember that Theresa May was once a campaigner to remain. On 25 April 2016 she said: “In essence, the question the country has to answer … whether to Leave or Remain—is about how we maximise Britain’s security, prosperity and influence in the world, and how we maximise our sovereignty: that is, the control we have over our own affairs in future” She went on to answer her question by saying that the case for remaining was the stronger. She referred in her speech to how Europe stumbled towards war in the last century. She talked about a hard-headed analysis and confirmed that, on security, trade and the economy, we should stay in the EU. So before she lapsed into the language and rhetoric of “Brexit means Brexit” and “no deal is better than a bad deal”, she was very clear that our “destiny”—again I use her word, not mine—was better inside the EU. Those are strong words, and very different words from those we hear today What happens next? There are no strict rules on any of this, and certainly no written rules. It seems that the UK desperately needs those written rules now more than ever, but there is no written constitution in this country. So where from here? I still hold the memories and bear some of the scars of the Scottish referendum. As I mentioned, it was never the outpouring of democracy that some, especially in the SNP, like to suggest. It was divisive and damaging If it had gone the other way, I say this: I am totally convinced that some of the unionists opposite me today, who—whether as Brexiteers or government supporters—strongly oppose a new referendum on the EU issue, if there had a been a yes vote on independence would have been strongly supporting a second referendum on the detail of that independence vote, to try to keep Scotland inside the UKU, highlighting the divisive, damaging consequences of a disastrous deal. Such is politics in times of turmoil What Theresa May could have done before Christmas, when she realised she was going to be defeated in Parliament, was surely call a second vote, a new referendum. A win-win situation for her, you would have thought. Either the Prime Minister would get the backing for her deal from the people of Great Britain, or we remain in the EU—the position which she supported and perhaps somewhere deep down still does support. Her alternative is ploughing on. Is that better? Why does she do it? Is it better for the Conservative Party? Is it better for the Government? Is it better for the people of this country, better for our future? We shall see—but I see no sign of it being better “Accept the deal”, she says. And if we do not trust her—and it seems clear that we do not, either in this place or in the other place—we are no longer at the kicking the can down the road stage of all this, are we? It seems that we go closer and closer to the edge of the cliff and, unless Parliament intervenes, we might all together go over the edge of that cliff. This is high-noon, high-wire madness. It is not good government, it is a derogation of duty. It is done because the Prime Minister has lost sight of her duty to act in the best interests of the nation, and instead is desperately trying to hold together something, I know not what: her Ministers, her party, maybe in her own mind our country. Already over 100 of her MPs believe that she is not the best person to lead her own party, far less our country. It is highly possible that with a new referendum she would win support—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-14-lords.u72	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-14	Stephen, Nicol Ross	Call for second Brexit referendum	2019-01-14 00:00:00	2019-01-14 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for his strong and powerful words as a former Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I can only agree with everything he said. I think other countries around the world look to this country because of our, sadly, extensive experience in fighting terrorism here. They look to us for expertise, and they look to us to say and do the right thing in these terrible situations.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u369	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Hunt, Jeremy Richard Streynsham	Commending terrorism expertise	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords	My Lords, I too welcome my noble friend Lady Hayman and congratulate her on her maiden speech. I serve on your Lordships’ Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. This committee was formed in 1992 to deal with the growing tendency of Governments to seek wide order-making powers which give Ministers unlimited discretion. The Bill is a prime example of why that committee is needed. We draw your Lordships’ attention to 11 delegated powers in the Bill, which include seven Henry VIII powers, to which the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, referred. These powers allow Ministers to amend, repeal or modify an Act of Parliament or a statutory instrument. Under Clauses 42, 43 and 45, Ministers are able to disregard any international or domestic law which they consider to be incompatible or inconsistent with the Northern Ireland protocol. That is why in paragraph 2 of our report we say that “Some of these powers are extraordinary; others are unprecedented. ” As the Minister explained, the stated purpose of the Bill is to allow free trade within the United Kingdom. Clause 3 states that any item permitted to be sold in one part of the United Kingdom under devolved legislation is automatically available for sale in other devolved areas on the principle of mutual recognition of goods. This means that the lowest standard becomes acceptable. What is more, this requirement applies not only to the goods themselves but to their packaging, labelling, assessment, registration and documentation, as my noble friend Lady Andrews explained. This is despite government assurances that our standards will not fall when we leave the EU. Standards become a race to the bottom, as the noble Lord, Lord Bruce, explained The committee’s view is that Clause 3 should be deleted. I understand that amendments will be brought forward to do this. There are further clauses in the Bill which override powers granted to the devolved Administrations regarding such things as consumer protection, financial aid and social welfare; indeed, powers are granted to UK Ministers to spend money over the heads of devolved Administrations, even on devolved matters Clauses 42 and 43 allow Ministers to disregard provisions of international or domestic law for technical reasons; this is one of the unprecedented powers to which our report refers. When your Lordships reported in September, the Bill was in the other place, and, as we say in our note dated 13 October, the Government did not take the opportunity to address the points which we raised. It seems to me that this disregard for the arguments of your Lordships’ committee is yet another example of this Government seeking to impose their will rather than seeking parliamentary approval. In doing so, they ignore the public interest in matters of law, diplomacy and the nation’s integrity. This undermines the integrity of public life and allows Ministers to break the Ministerial Code. The only justification seems to be that Ministers need these powers to act quickly, especially in an emergency. Well, Parliament can act quickly and in an emergency. Speed is no reason for imposing the will of Ministers on the devolved Administrations in this divisive manner.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords.u124	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-19	Haskel, Simon	Government overreach in legislation	2020-10-19 00:00:00	2020-10-19 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords	I am aware of the meeting and the letter which Minister Skidmore wrote—on 16 May, I believe. I can tell my noble friend that there have been some replies, so I believe that the message is getting through. However, I am the first to say that there is more work to be done. King’s College London has adopted the IHRA definition, but I believe that that happened before the letter was written. Just to complicate matters, we have to respect institutional autonomy as regards how higher education providers operate, although obviously government has a role.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords.u52	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-10	Younger, James	Institutional autonomy respected progress noted	2019-07-10 00:00:00	2019-07-10 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	On Monday, the Prime Minister set out the action we need to take between now and the start of December to control the spread of coronavirus. In response, we are providing significant extra support to protect jobs and livelihoods in every region and nation of the United Kingdom: an extension to the coronavirus job retention scheme; more generous support to the self-employed and paying that support more quickly; cash grants of up to £3,000 per month for businesses that are closed, worth over a billion pounds every month; £1.6 billion for English councils to support their local economy and local healthcare response; longer to apply for our loan schemes and the future fund; the chance to top up bounce back loans; and an extension to mortgage payment holidays. That is all on top of more than £200 billion of fiscal support since March This statement follows the Bank of England’s monetary policy decisions earlier today, meaning all economic and monetary institutions are playing their part. As the House would expect, the Governor and I are in constant communication as the situation evolves. Our responses are carefully designed to complement each other and provide certainty and support to people and businesses across the UK. The Bank’s forecast this morning shows that economic activity is supported by our substantial fiscal and monetary policy action. Just last week, the International Monetary Fund described the UK’s economic plan as “aggressive”, “unprecedented”, successful in “holding down unemployment” and business failures, and “one of the best examples of coordinated action globally” Our highest priority remains the same: to protect jobs and livelihoods. That is why we have already decided to extend the job retention scheme to December. But people and businesses will want to know what comes next, how long we plan to keep the scheme open, and on what terms. They want certainty. The Government’s intention is for the new health restrictions to remain only until the start of December, but, as we saw from the first lockdown, the economic effects are much longer lasting for businesses and areas than the duration of any restrictions. As the Bank of England has said this morning, the economic recovery has slowed and the economic risks are “skewed to the downside. ” Given this significant uncertainty, a worsening economic backdrop and the need to give people and businesses security through the winter, I believe it is right to go further, so we can announce today that the furlough scheme will not be extended for one month; it will be extended until the end of March. The Government will continue to help to pay people’s wages up to 80% of the normal amount; all that employers will have to pay for hours not worked is the cost of employer national insurance contributions and pension contributions. We will review the policy in January to decide whether economic circumstances are improving enough to ask employers to contribute more Of course, as the furlough itself is now being extended to the end of March, the original purpose of the job retention bonus to incentivise employers to keep people in work until the end of January obviously falls away. Instead, we will redeploy a retention incentive at the appropriate time. For self-employed people, I can confirm that the next income support grant, which covers the period November to January, will now increase to 80% of average profits, up to £7,500 I also want to reassure the people of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The furlough scheme was designed and delivered by the Government of the United Kingdom, on behalf of all the people of the United Kingdom, wherever they live. That has been the case since March, it is the case now and it will remain the case until next March. It is a demonstration of the strength of the Union and an undeniable truth of this crisis that we have been able to provide this level of economic support only because we are a United Kingdom. I can announce today that the up-front guaranteed funding for the devolved Administrations is increasing from £14 billion to £16 billion. This Treasury is, has been and will always be the Treasury for the whole of the United Kingdom I know that people watching at home will have been frustrated by the changes that the Government have brought in during the past few weeks. I have had to make rapid adjustments to our economic plans as the spread of the virus has accelerated. I would like to take this opportunity to explain how and why this has happened. During the summer, as we began slowly unlocking, it was our hope that the country would continue to be economically open, albeit with local restrictions being put in place as and when needed. We knew that there would likely be a resurgence in the spread of the virus, but with increased NHS capacity and test and trace, our belief was that we would be able to stay ahead of the virus. On that basis, we designed an economic approach that continued to provide wage support to people, incentivised businesses to retain staff beyond the end of the furlough scheme, and created new job-creation and training schemes such as kickstart, all built to support an economy that was broadly open but operating with restrictions and overall lower demand. At the time, this approach was not Government acting alone. Our proposals secured wide-ranging support, from the TUC to the CBI. It was their hope, as it was ours, that the public health situation would allow us to keep businesses and workplaces open The virus, however, continued to spread. Localised restrictions were having an impact, so we intensified this approach and added further areas. As these restrictions intensified, the economic impact, particularly on industries such as the hospitality sector, was significant, so in response we altered our approach to wage support, making it much more generous to employers and in turn protecting jobs. We also introduced a range of grants to businesses, whether open or closed, to help them meet their fixed costs, and additional funding for local authorities to respond to specific local economic challenges But again, the virus continued to spread, but more quickly, and so we arrive at last week, when the Government’s scientific and medical advisers presented data which showed that R is greater than 1 in all parts of the country, that the NHS was at risk of being overwhelmed in a matter of weeks and the likely resultant loss of life that would accompany such an event. The only viable solution left to protect our NHS was the reimposition of temporary significant enhanced restrictions in England, in addition to those in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. So given these changed public health restrictions and the economic trauma they would cause in job losses and business closures, I felt it best to extend the furlough scheme rather than transition at that precise moment to the new job support scheme Political opponents have chosen to attack the Government for trying to keep the economy functioning and to make sure the support we provide encourages people to keep working. They will now no doubt criticise the Government on the basis that we have had to change our approach, but to anyone in the real world that is just the thing you have to do when the circumstances change. We all hope for the best but make sure we plan for any eventuality. We can reintroduce the furlough now only because we kept the system on which it is based operational, because there was always the possibility that we would be back in this situation. I will leave it to the people of this country to decide whether they believe the Government are trying our best to support people through an unprecedented crisis, to decide whether it is a good or bad thing to alter our economic plans as the health restrictions we face change What I know is that the support we are providing will protect millions of jobs. What I know is that it is never wrong to convey confidence in this country and our economy through our words and action. And what I know is that today’s announcement will give people and businesses up and down our country immense comfort over what will be a difficult winter. I commend this statement to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u252	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Sunak, Rishi	Extended coronavirus economic support package	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons	I am of course aware of the report and we are of course taking every reasonable step to prepare this country for a second spike. I may say to the right hon. Gentleman that it is up to him, really, to get behind what the Government are doing or not. He has previously supported our plan. He has previously come to this House and said that he supports our measures. He now says, I think, that he does not support them. I think what he needs to do is build up the confidence of the people of this country cautiously to get back to work and cautiously to restart our economy, which is what we are trying to do, instead of endlessly knocking the confidence of the people of this country: knocking their confidence in test and trace, knocking their confidence in the safety of our schools and knocking our confidence in our transport network. Now is the time for him to decide whether he backs the Government or not.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons.u74	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Support government efforts or not	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-13-commons	I congratulate the hon. Member for Wakefield (Imran Ahmad Khan) on his very comprehensive speech. However, I have to say that he failed to mention the famous Wakefield Trinity rugby league team. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure that you, like me, noticed that. As the Member for Wood Green, I know that the London Skolars rugby league club is in Wood Green and may well one day meet Trinity, which is, of course, a very famous rugby league team. In replacing the outgoing Member for Wakefield, the hon. Gentleman has very large shoes to fill. I look forward to further, perhaps shorter, interventions to learn more about him We know that good foreign policy is underpinned by three basic pillars of security, trade and human rights. In my remarks today, which will be quite short, I will set out why I believe that the UK’s departure from the European Union could, in geopolitical terms, weaken our role, our influence and our position in the world. Hopefully, that will only be for the short term, but it will certainly be for the foreseeable future World peace and the UK’s security rely on a series of strong relationships and networks that can assert a dominant position so that aggressive forces can be held in check. Belonging to the EU provides a non-military network of friends and allies to rely on in tough times. Modern defence issues are as much about shared databases as traditional notions of bombs and guns. Leaving European agreements on security undermines a well-tested system of keeping us safe. Brexit puts at real risk the joint approaches with European systems to ensure cyber-security and the sharing of intelligence. It also undermines the European arrest warrant. Abandoning our leadership role in European affairs could fragment a very strong and assertive voice in defence, such as in discussions on cyber-security, in shared counter-terror tools and in wider questions of weapons proliferation Increasingly, climate change also presents insecurity on a global scale. This year, the UK could become a true leader on the climate crisis, with Glasgow hosting the COP26 climate summit in November—I hope it will be more conclusive than the Madrid meeting—following closely on Labour’s push for this House to become the first Parliament in the world to declare a climate emergency. It is a real pleasure to hear Members from across the House promoting the role that the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association play in developing that role for parliamentarians Although the UK has a good policy platform at the level of UK missions abroad—for example, promoting measures to mitigate climate change—this priority could be at risk if a free trade agreement demands some other priority.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-13-commons.u311	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-13	West, Catherine Elizabeth	UK weakened by Brexit impact	2020-01-13 00:00:00	2020-01-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	I know that many Members across this House share my concern that Brexit and the removal of hard-won EU legislation will mean a race to the bottom for workers’ rights in the UK. In that respect, it is at least a little bit encouraging to see a commitment to continuing to increase minimum wages; however, as I have said time and again in this place, it does not go nearly far enough. The UK Government’s pretendy living wage is not enough to live on. The real living wage, as calculated by the Living Wage Foundation, is set at £9 an hour, or £10.55 an hour in London; the pretendy living wage falls short of that. For those of us who want a highly educated, highly skilled, high-wage economy, it continues to be extremely disappointing that the UK Government choose not to increase the minimum wage to a level people can actually live on High wages are linked to increased productivity—an issue the UK has struggled with for many, many years—increased staff retention and higher standards of workers. A substantial increase in wages is not a choice between acting in the interests of businesses and acting in the interests of employees; it is entirely possible to cover both. The attitude that I am hearing from Government Members is that the national living wage falls short of a real living wage, but we should celebrate it anyway because it represents a pay rise for working people. That shows a real lack of aspiration on the part of the UK Government—a Government who claim that they want to help people work their way out of poverty but whose actions fail those people time and again If this UK Government really wanted people to work their way out of poverty, they would be investing in our labour markets, increasing the powers of trade unions and improving the rights of those in insecure work. They are presiding over one of the lowest rates of real wage growth among the advanced nations of the G20. Andy Haldane at the Bank of England has described the past 10 years as “a lost decade” for workers, and the measures today will do very little to address that problem As things stand, the Chancellor is giving with one hand and taking away with the other. For those at the lower end of the income scale, the proposed increase in the minimum wage does not even offset the impact of the benefits freeze. I and my hon. Friends have consistently called for an end to the benefits freeze, which is a pay cut by stealth for some of the lowest earning people in this country. We welcome the Labour party’s commitment to scrap it, even if it did not feature in its 2017 manifesto The age pay gap is the income inequality that the national minimum wage policy creates between age groups. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy impact assessment on the policy explicitly states that the purpose of a lower minimum wage for under 25s is to “maximise the wages of low paid younger workers, without damaging their employment prospects. ” It also says that the Government asked the Low Pay Commission to recommend separate national minimum wage rates “by age band (16-17, 18-20 year olds, and 21-24 year olds). ” There is no real evidence to justify why that is necessary. It is insulting to young people in my constituency and across these islands to say that employers would not want them if they had to be paid a fair wage; quite apart from that, it entices employers to make hiring decisions based on age, encouraging unscrupulous employers to break the law Make no mistake, this is state-sponsored age discrimination. In the impact assessment, the public sector equality duty sets out that the Government must “eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act” It goes on: “The protected characteristics consist of nine groups: age, race, gender, disability, religion or belief, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, marriage and civil partnership. ” If women were to be paid less than men, that would be against the law because gender is one of the protected characteristics; mysteriously, however, this impact assessment does not extend to age. I would really like to see some smart lawyer take a legal challenge against the Government, because there is clear discrimination in the terms of this statutory instrument on the basis of age alone. There is no justifiable reason for this policy To compound matters further, the proposal that we are discussing today will increase the pay gap between age groups. The uprating that will result from the regulations means that 24-year-olds could earn £90 less a month than 25-year-olds for exactly the same job, amounting to a difference of more than £1,000 a year. The gap would increase even further within the under-25 age groups, making it even harder for young people to get by. Since the measure was brought in in 2016, 18 to 20-year-olds have seen the age pay gap between themselves and someone on the higher rate go from £1.90 to £2.06; 16 and 17-year-olds have seen it rise from £3.33 to £3.86—that gap between the highest wage and all that they are legally entitled to be paid—and for apprentices, the gap has gone from £3.90 to £4.31. No justification is given in the impact assessment for that state-sponsored age discrimination If I were to suggest that Members of Parliament—an MP born in 1973, perhaps, like my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Chris Stephens), or an MP born in 1978, like the Minister, or myself, born in 1982—were to be paid different rates depending on age, I cannot imagine any MP in the House signing up to that. Why should young people face the discrimination in law that the Government are proposing today?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u420	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Thewliss, Alison Emily	Insufficient minimum wage age discrimination	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-lords	The Minister repeated the estimates from March of how this would impact British business. I remind the House of how the business community described those figures. The CBI described them as a “sledgehammer to our economy”, and said that they show, “everything that is wrong with a no-deal scenario”, and that there had been no input from businesses. The Federation of Small Businesses described them as “undercutting”. When I took the textile firms that I used to represent in my former constituency through what the implications would be, they described them as devastating for the remainder of that sector. If these measures are a “contingency”—as the former Business Secretary described them to the BEIS Committee in the Commons when it asked him about them in March—rather than anything definite, what consultation has there been with the business community? If the figures have not changed, as the Minister indicated, then we can assume that there will be no changes, so we would start to feel their dramatic impact almost immediately if there is a no-deal scenario Secondly, the Minister will recall that these “contingency measures”, as they were called then, were published alongside what would have been the emergency measures for the Northern Ireland border, because we cannot have this tariff regime in place without mechanisms for what would be our land border with the European Union. Can the Minister be very clear: would the contingency arrangements covering the Northern Ireland border that the Government also published in March be implemented in a no-deal scenario Finally, the Minister rather glibly said “shortly”. If this measure is put in place, it will be because there has been no deal. That could be in a little more than 10 days in which Parliament can consider the implications of the next European Council. If businesses are not to see a repeat of the lack of input that they described in March, will the Government at least publish what the responses from the business community have been if we are to take the Government at their word that it has been consulted?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-lords.u137	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-07	Purvis, Jeremy	No-deal impacts business severely	2019-10-07 00:00:00	2019-10-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons	It goes without saying that the UK steel industry is critical to our manufacturing base and that protecting the industry should be of paramount importance to the Government. The industry provides over 30,000 highly skilled, well-paid jobs in the UK, and British Steel directly employs around 4,500 in Scunthorpe, with a further 20,000 down the supply chain. Does the Minister agree the Government should be doing everything in their power to prevent British Steel from entering administration It is reported that British Steel had initially asked the Government for a £75 million loan in emergency financial support and subsequently reduced that request to around £30 million following negotiations with the Department. Will the Minister outline the asks of British Steel throughout the negotiations? Have the discussions included just financial support or a wider package of measures to support the site in Scunthorpe and the steel industry more widely Will the Minister confirm the status of the negotiations and why they are reported to have stalled in recent days? It has been reported that one of the reasons was the Department’s frustration with Greybull Capital’s apparent unwillingness to put money on the table. Will the Minister confirm whether that is the case? What impact did the company’s decision to acquire Ascoval last week have on the negotiations? If no deal can be reached with Greybull, have the Government considered any other options, such as bringing British Steel into public ownership Finally, the steel sector is facing myriad issues, from the value of sterling and the uncertainty around future trading with the EU through to US trade tariffs, and the Government could have taken steps to address them, such as greater procurement of UK steel, agreeing a sector deal, as the industry was requesting, and taking action on energy prices. Does the Minister accept that this Government have simply failed to take the steps necessary to ensure that UK steel remains competitive?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-21-commons.u183	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-21	Furniss, Gillian	Support for UK steel industry	2019-05-21 00:00:00	2019-05-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons	My right hon. Friend is right. I disagree with some of the points made by the hon. Member for Swansea West (Geraint Davies), but if he was right we would be suffering those problems at distance through the EU; if indeed it was the problem that he describes, it would not be a new problem.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons.u281	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-08	Duddridge, James Philip	Dispute over EU-related issues	2020-01-08 00:00:00	2020-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-commons	I mentioned a few moments ago the example from an airport boss relayed to me this morning where a day zero test failed to pick somebody up whereas a day seven or eight test was able to do that. That shows why a single test on arrival is not the solution, much as it is not the solution to temperature-test somebody on arrival to see whether they have got coronavirus. We need to be more sophisticated than that, and we absolutely will be. I remind the hon. Gentleman that different parts of the devolved Administrations will need to come to their own decisions on it as well.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-commons.u176	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-07	Shapps, Grant	Day zero test insufficient detection	2020-09-07 00:00:00	2020-09-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for that introduction. She need not worry about repeating herself; I do that all too often—and I write my own speeches, so she has my sympathy. I am really looking forward to hearing speeches from around the House, but it is a disappointment that we will not get to hear the valedictory by the noble Baroness, Lady Emerton. I simply want to say for the record how much we on this side, especially my colleagues in the health team, have valued her contribution to the House, nursing education and the NHS more broadly. She will be greatly missed It feels slightly strange and unreal to be here discussing the details of Bills when out there, the Government only have eyes for Brexit. Indeed, the Prime Minister is champing at the bit to dissolve the Parliament which Her Majesty opened only last week with this gracious Speech. However, here we are, so we must do our job. The Minister has ably set out the Government’s vision for the future of Britain. As she said, the Prime Minister claims it is an ambitious programme which has at its heart a new vision for Britain and that the Government want to make the UK the greatest place to live, work and do business. This cannot be the greatest country to live in unless it is a great place for all our people to live in. We are interdependent, and the true flourishing of any of us depends on the flourishing of all of us, so my test of this speech and this programme is whether it can deliver on that vision The welfare state embodies a vision of Britain as a country where we take care of each other. We all pay into it and for it, because we all need it at some point. Some will need it more, but we do not know who that is going to be or whether it might be us. It supports those raising the next generation. It helps all of us at key life stages or in times of need—in pregnancy, sickness, unemployment or bereavement. It gives extra help to those who need it most: those with long-term illnesses or disabilities, or who care for others. It helps make work pay, and it supports us all in retirement. However, our system is increasingly losing its way. The past decade has seen massive cuts to benefits, damaging reforms, especially of disability benefits, and the awfulness that is universal credit. It has seen the demonisation of claimants and an explosion in benefit sanctions, often for the most minor infractions, which have combined to drive people into poverty and to take away their dignity. More and more people are struggling to make ends meet, dependent on food banks or even sending their kids to school hungry What, then, does the Queen’s Speech have to say about that situation? As we heard, there is one DWP Bill, the Pension Schemes Bill. We are in broad agreement with the stated aims of the Bill and we will crawl over the detail. My noble friends Lord McKenzie of Luton and Lady Drake will speak more about pensions later, but that is it: there is nothing on social security and the word “poverty” is mentioned nowhere, even though 14 million of our citizens—4 million of them children—are living in poverty. In-work poverty is on the rise and most poor children now live in working households What did Ministers think was going to happen when they set out to cut £37 billion from our social security system? The benefit freeze alone will have taken £4.4 billion from our poorest families by the time it ends next year. I was horrified recently to hear the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions refuse to rule out extending the freeze still further. To do that would be to deliberately and knowingly drive more people into poverty and deeper poverty, so I hope the Minister can reassure us that that will not happen. I trust that she will not say that that is a matter for the Budget, because while Ministers have been quite happy to trail tax cuts—there is always money for tax cuts—it is strange that there is never as much money when it comes to benefits for the poorest Labour has committed to a £3 billion programme to reverse the worst of the cuts, including the disgraceful two-child limit, and to begin to unpick the disasters of universal credit. A Labour Government would seek to change the culture and create a system dedicated to dignity, universalism and ending poverty. That is our vision of a country where everyone can flourish. Will the Minister tell us what the Government’s vision is Our welfare state pools risk across our population and across lifetimes. It is the companion service to the NHS, which also works on the basis that we pool our risk because any of us can get sick. It is because of that underlying vision that the NHS is more than just a public service: it embodies how we as a nation see ourselves as an interdependent community. I am sorry to say, however, that our NHS is struggling and there was not much comfort in the Queen’s Speech. Most of the funding announcements had previously been announced and most of the proposals—for example, for a long-term plan, reforming the Mental Health Act and addressing social care—are very much in the future. Right now, across the NHS, services are missing financial and performance targets. People are waiting ever longer for treatment and a shortage of staff threatens the quality of patient care. Where is the urgent concrete action to deal with these problems Meanwhile, social care is in crisis: adult social care is badly failing those who rely on it, with high levels of unmet need and providers struggling to deliver the quality of care that vulnerable people need and have a right to expect. However, the funding announcement on social care had previously been announced and £500 million has to be raised by councils themselves, even though those in the industry had made it clear that that was, in their words, a “short-term sticking plaster”. Without more funding or a detailed plan as to how we get there, older and disabled people will continue to be left without the care they need, and carers will increasingly buckle under the strain Labour has set out its vision for a national care service, but we do not know what the Government’s vision is. The Prime Minister promised us that he had a plan to fix the crisis once and for all, but I see no plan, just endless consultation. One has to assume that the ever-delayed Green Paper has perhaps finally bitten the dust. If so, we are left with no proposals and no legislative timetable for a social care Bill in this Parliament. I hope the Minister can contradict me because, if not, that simply is not good enough Mental Health was too often addressed in similarly broad terms. It is now almost a year since the independent review of the Mental Health Act was published, but we still do not have a White Paper. Ministers announced a mental health Bill in December 2018 but we still do not have one. There are urgent problems: mental health beds are closing; the mental health estate is crumbling; the CQC has recently reported chronic staff shortages and deteriorating services; children and young people are waiting more than a year for mental health services and many have been turned away because they were not yet bad enough. Can the Minister tell us when will we see some action? My noble friend Lady Wheeler will say more about social care in her contribution I am afraid that that pattern of revisiting old promises with slightly vague offers of new ones permeates the Queen’s Speech. In education, again, we are short on commitments to new legislation or policy. Even previous ministerial commitments that need legislation have not made their way into the Queen’s Speech. For example, Ministers said they would introduce a schools’ level-funding formula “as soon as possible” but where is it Only a few weeks ago the Secretary of State said that he would, “put the school uniform guidance on a statutory footing”, and will do so when a suitable opportunity arises. School uniform costs are rocketing and something is needed, but where is the legislation? Where is the guidance? Furthermore, despite specifically consulting on primary legislation to regulate home education, there is no sign of it in the Queen’s Speech. Can the Minister tell us why and when it will be brought forward? My noble friend Lord Watson of Invergowrie will talk more about education across the spread in his contribution The DCMS is the final area covered today but the key announcements on broadband rollout and online harms were covered in part by my noble friend Lord Stevenson of Balmacara on Thursday and my colleagues will pick that up later, so I will not dwell further on it here. However, I want to note the widespread disappointment that Ministers did not use the Queen’s Speech to commit to reverse the cuts to BBC funding for the over-75s licence fee. That should never have been dumped on the BBC in the first place and I urge the Government to review it. Labour will; will the Minister please do likewise We have looked at this programme through the lens of some of our most important public services and the welfare state as a safety net for all of us. Does that vision stand up to scrutiny? I do not think that it does. It is not enough just to declare that you want to make Britain great again. If we want a country where all our people can flourish and where they can fulfil their potential and contribute to the flourishing of the nation, government must will the means as well as the end We do not need another decade of cutting taxes for the better-off while slashing benefits for the poorest, of letting our most important public services lurch from crisis to crisis and of abandoning vulnerable people to the care of friends and family. We need a new era characterised by mutual care and by a determination to tackle inequality, protect the vulnerable and give every child the best possible start in life, wherever they live and however unwisely they chose their parents. That is the vision that I want to see and I urge the Government to follow that instead.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-lords.u67	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-22	Sherlock, Maeve Christina Mary	Criticizing welfare cuts and inaction	2019-10-22 00:00:00	2019-10-22 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords	That is a very intriguing aspect of an issue that we will wrestle with on Report, but we are all on the same page in many respects. I need to refine my arguments, and perhaps we might then meet somewhere. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, and all noble Lords, for this rather elongated discussion.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords.u83	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-04	Gardiner, John Eric	Agreement despite ongoing debate	2020-03-04 00:00:00	2020-03-04 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons	Yes, and we are talking about very little money. It really is a small amount of money that would allow our continued participation and that valuable and rich experience for young people to continue, so this makes absolutely no sense to us I have yet to see any evidence, in the few years that I have been a Member of this Parliament, of this Government really considering education to be a societal good. We saw the abandonment of the nursing bursary. Obviously, we then had a drop in applications. The Government then partially went back on that, but nurses will still have to pay them £9,000-odd a year, regardless of the nursing bursary, so I am not seeing that The Secretary of State also talked of collaboration and the sharing of best practice between Scotland and England. That is brilliant. I am really pleased to hear that, and I hope that he is going to match our per-pupil funding, our teacher-pupil ratio, our teachers’ pay, including for teachers in academies, and our commitment to further and higher education. I also hope that, rather than giving young people debt through fees of £9,000-odd or £7,000 a year, this Government will look at abandoning tuition fees altogether. Let us look to best practice: look to Scotland.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-commons.u276	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-14	Monaghan, Carol Frances	Government should invest in education	2020-01-14 00:00:00	2020-01-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-11-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Sir Edward Davey). I have happy memories of being in government with him in the coalition Government 10 years ago. It is also a pleasure to speak from the Back Benches for the first time since the reshuffle I congratulate colleagues from both sides of the House on some outstanding maiden speeches and our new Chancellor on a dazzling debut. He takes office at a time of immense challenge: flooding here in the UK; the challenge of decarbonisation; coronavirus; a global economic slowdown; and a massive challenge of delivering the promise, and now expectation, of levelling up by so many communities across the country. I warmly welcome his announcements today, in particular his genuinely historic commitment to a once-in-a-generation science, innovation and infrastructure revolution to drive connectivity of opportunity for levelling up It is on that last theme that I want to concentrate this afternoon. I have argued for a decade that the challenge of renewal and regeneration is the key to a sustainable post-crash economics that is genuinely sustainable: investing in a more resilient economic model; better spreading opportunity out from the city; and tackling the deep grievances incubated through a decade of deepening public disillusionment, back to Iraq through expenses, the banking crash, the inevitable decade of austerity, globalisation, and the process itself of the EU referendum. As I have often argued elsewhere, in my constituency and in much of the country the rise of UKIP and the 2016 referendum result was as much a roar against domestic grievances of disconnection as it was about the obvious inadequacies of the EU. We have to make this a bold moment of economic, democratic, social and cultural renewal This belief in renewal and regeneration is not a new crusade for me; it has been the defining mission and idea at the heart of my career—indeed, my life. I believe there is no more noble mission—whether as an individual suffering a life collapse, as my late father did, as a child from a broken home, or as a family, community, charity, company or country—than to defy the challenges you face and win against the odds. It is the stuff of life. It is what drew me into a career in the exciting world of high-growth technology companies and venture finance: the chance to have a dream with a small team, raise some money and make a profound difference That belief that we can, in this place, make a difference runs through the heart of the best of our democracy. It is why, after the Iraq crisis of trust, I started Mind the Gap! and Positive Politics. It is why, post crash, I led the calls in the coalition for an active industrial strategy for life science, for agri-tech, for cleantech to grow the exciting sectors of our economy with the biggest global potential. It is why after the EU referendum I was clear, as a noisy former remainer, that I was absolutely committed, as we must be, to delivering Brexit as a moment of inspiring national renewal that could work for those, however they voted in that referendum. That is why I spent the past three years setting up the big tent to capitalise on a wider conversation with people beyond Westminster, especially the next generation, to produce a vision for Britain beyond Brexit with 45 fellow MPs in our 2020 Conservative group—I am delighted to be flanked by three contributors to it—convening the one nation caucus and insisting that the Conservative party needs to discover the one nation tradition that runs through our core. It is why I campaigned for, and continue to support, the Prime Minister in his electrifying crusade to shake up the failing silos, quangos and Whitehall structures, catalyse a new energy, and deliver for the people and places that have been left behind by globalisation and so much of modern economic growth. It is why I was relishing helping to shake up the Department for Transport to better adapt to the challenges of decarbonisation, digitalisation and disconnection I deeply believe that if we get this right, we can make Brexit a genuinely inspiring and transformational moment of national renewal, defining ourselves not as the service economy of the European Union, but as a global science and innovation superpower, exploiting our freedoms outside the restrictive EU regulations—which I described in the “Fresh Start” report five years ago—as a global hub of technology leadership in the exciting fields of life science and agritech, where we have the ability to develop transformational technologies such as the blight-resistant potato and the drought-resistant wheats for sustainably feeding, fuelling and healing the developing world. We can use a new aid, trade and security alignment to better export our technology to the fastest-emerging markets. Here at home we can embrace bold new devolution deals, unlocking new leadership and new models of city and personal financing of innovation. New northern powerhouses and eastern engines can unleash economic growth and renewal, one regional economy at a time, creating new opportunities for the people and places that have been left behind. It could be genuinely inspiring, taking back control to give opportunity to the British people the Conservative way, with Brexit as a moment that we deliver the promises of the referendum and tackle the grievances that so many people who voted the other way feared would be ignored Given all that, and the fact that I had just announced some major funding for cycling, it was a bit of a surprise to find myself on my bike back to the Back Benches, as part of a No. 10 masterplan for Treasury, science and transport infrastructure. But Ministers come and go—it is a tough business and a team sport—and I am not here to complain. I absolutely agree with the idea of using the commanding heights of Treasury, science and infrastructure to deliver the levelling-up agenda. Projects from No. 10 can make a difference and get things done. I was involved in one when we launched the 100,000 Genomes Project—a small group of us did it and it worked. I totally understand the instinct and mandate to take the election result as a moment of bold reform The truth is that across Whitehall our Government are struggling to keep up with the pace of technology and digitalisation, personalisation and accountability, and voter exhaustion with bureaucracy. We will never unlock a genuine innovation economy without real reform, but we need policies that are on a scale of, but very different from, the reforms of the 1980s—the right to buy, the privatisation of failing nationalised industries, the big bang and the enterprise revolution. We need big policies that deliver big change As history shows, we have a woeful record in this country of delivering successful infrastructure. The UK is already massively over-centralised. The Brexit vote showed that people have had enough of London bureaucracies taking control. Local and regional economies dying through marginalisation will not be revived by an all-mighty No. 10 Brexit bunker issuing diktats. Taking back control must mean by and for them—the people we are here to serve—not Whitehall. Real regeneration and empowerment comes from the empowerment of devolution to people and places If we are serious about the real and lasting regeneration of places left behind, we have to take some tough decisions now about how we are going to do it and learn the lessons of what has, and has not, worked in the past—why we have failed so spectacularly with projects such as Crossrail and the west coast main line, and even worse, locally, why cities such as Cambridge, Europe’s fastest-growing city region, is still running on 19th-century infrastructure. I warmly welcome the Chancellor’s announcement on Cambridge South station today. We need to learn from what has worked, such as the London Docklands, Liverpool, the County Durham development corporation and the Olympic park I pay tribute to a former Member of the House who has not only written the book but done a lot of the business on this, Michael Heseltine—that lion of regeneration. No one has done more on this than he, and I commend to those who have not read it his 2012 report “No Stone Unturned”. It is essential reading for all new MPs or special advisers. The key lesson is that without real, investable, locally led, non-partisan engines of leadership and investment, this will not work. I am absolutely delighted and proud that we have invested £5 billion for towns, £5 billion for buses, £5 billion for stations and £5 billion for high streets—£5 billion seems to be the new chip in the Treasury strip. I warmly welcome the Chancellor’s announcement today of a £100 billion infrastructure revolution, but how is all this money going to be spent? What are the engines of renewal and regeneration that we are going to set up to be able to access that money, pull in private money and unlock local leadership? We should do that in the north, but let us not forget the coastal towns and the marginalised rural towns. How are those places, which have been left behind, going to access that money and make a difference? How does a town such as Grimsby, which has set out a brilliant strategy and has put together a little partnership board, going to access the money to do the local brownfield development, the transport links and the sustainable growth That applies equally to Stoke, Sunderland, Burnley, Bradford, Bassetlaw, Peterhead, Preston, Penzance. Around the country, we have promised these small cities and big towns that we will renew and regenerate. We have to have an answer to the question: how? The same is true for towns such as Watton, in my constituency, left behind even in its own county, left behind by its own local enterprise partnership, on the edge of nowhere, on the road to nowhere, but waiting, excited by this prospect. But who will make this money work for Watton ? We need a regeneration delivery policy to deliver this bold renewal: railway development companies, freeport enterprise corporations, regional infrastructure bonds. Around the country, we have to create the engines that can fund, invest and lead these projects and so drive regeneration Some leave Government to spend more time Parliament. Tony Benn famously said he was leaving Government to spend more time doing politics. I am leaving Government to do more of this work—to work around the country, in East Anglia and elsewhere, to help put together private-public partnerships to drive this regeneration. I am 100% committed to it, and I look forward to helping the Government make a success of this crucial mission.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-11-commons.u219	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-11	Freeman, George William	Economic renewal and regeneration agenda	2020-03-11 00:00:00	2020-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-commons	My hon. Friend is making some excellent points. Jaguar Land Rover has invested a huge amount of money in south Staffordshire, on the border with Wolverhampton, precisely to build those engines at its engine plant. That has brought huge numbers of excellent job opportunities to both Wolverhampton and Staffordshire. Will he join me in paying tribute to its foresight on those clean engines?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-commons.u524	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-16	Lefroy, Jeremy John Elton	Praise Jaguar Land Rover investment	2019-01-16 00:00:00	2019-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-20-commons	First, the change to the policy introduced in 2018 was an amendment at the request of the IPCO. As I say, it is only a short number of weeks before we will get the review back from the Commissioner, and the Government will be able to look at the recommendations made. I will look at this in the round, as Members would expect of a new Secretary of State coming into the Department, and I will update the House. I fully hear what all Members in all parts of the House are saying. I understand, and I hope the House has confidence in the fact that I understand, how critically important these issues are, for, as I say again, the safety of our own armed forces, as well as other people, and I will give this my urgent attention.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-20-commons.u190	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-20	Mordaunt, Penelope Mary	Policy change review upcoming	2019-05-20 00:00:00	2019-05-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons	Q2. In the past 10 years, there have been volumes of reports, independent reviews and recommendations calling for an end to inappropriate in-patient care for people with learning difficulties or challenging behaviour. In the wake of the Winterbourne View scandal alone, there were seven such reports. As we start a new decade, would my right hon. Friend state how many people are still trapped in inappropriate care settings and instruct the Department of Health to act on those recommendations and the asks of families of campaigners so that these very vulnerable people can get the care they need and deserve?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-commons.u78	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-08	Mordaunt, Penelope Mary	Inappropriate care for vulnerable individuals	2020-01-08 00:00:00	2020-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons	We look at each case individually; I can give the hon. Lady that assurance. I do not want to get wrapped up in a strict legalistic interpretation of “duty of care”. I want to ensure that we apply our moral duty to do what we can for innocent British nationals; I can give her that assurance	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons.u208	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-22	Murrison, Andrew William	Applying moral duty individually	2019-10-22 00:00:00	2019-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	I was inspired suddenly, Mr Speaker I asked the Minister about this when he appeared before the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs yesterday: he says that he will bring back the sentencing Bill and the animal sentience Bill when we have parliamentary time, but we have spent an awful lot of parliamentary time sitting around, twiddling our thumbs and waiting for Brexit votes. He could bring forward that legislation very soon, could he not?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u63	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	McCarthy, Kerry Gillian	Bring back sentencing and sentience bills	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons	We want schools to work alongside parents, recognising that there are sensitivities to some areas of the subject matter. There is a requirement to consult parents and to publish the school’s policy on the internet. More broadly than that, we want schools to work alongside parents because this should be a collaborative effort.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons.u261	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Hinds, Damian Patrick George	Schools collaborating with parents	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-29-lords	My Lords, quite a number of companies will make extraordinary profits as a consequence of Covid-19. At this point in time it is hard to identify which they are, but we can see that it is happening with some traders and private equity players, and it may well be happening in the digital industry, which is becoming more and more dominant and, as others have said, pays almost no tax in the UK despite the size of its presence. Following our exit from lockdown and the pandemic, will the Government look at a windfall tax so that those who have sacrificed during the pandemic understand that the burden is being spread over everyone’s shoulders?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-29-lords.u56	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-29	Kramer, Susan	Covid-related company windfall tax	2020-04-29 00:00:00	2020-04-29 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-14-commons	A new Southern rail link connecting the south and south-west with Heathrow via Feltham was favourably assessed by Network Rail two years ago as having the highest benefit-cost ratio of all the Southern rail options proposed. We are waiting on the edge of our seats for progress towards the next stage. When will the Secretary of State be able to announce funding and proposed plans to take the project to the next stage, so that we can start to move forward?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-14-commons.u132	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-14	Malhotra-Saluja, Seema	Awaiting funding for Southern rail	2019-02-14 00:00:00	2019-02-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-18-commons	The hon. Gentleman has asked me about a particular individual and it would not be appropriate for me to be drawn into that On a more general note, if individuals have left Britain to join Daesh or other terrorist organisations in that region, we can understand why they are considered a threat to individuals and to our values in this country, and to our allies across the world. Those individuals have made that decision, and the Government’s first priority is to protect this country and do whatever is necessary. If those individuals have more than one nationality—again, I will not be drawn on a particular individual—we have the ability where appropriate to strip them of their British nationality. I have done that on several occasions and will continue to do so where I deem it appropriate. If that is not possible, we have other ways to manage the risk The hon. Gentleman asked specifically about the grooming of young people by extremists and terrorist organisations, which sadly we have seen in this country and elsewhere. The Government are working with other public bodies to try to stop that, for example through the Prevent programme, which has been very successful to date. It is about safeguarding vulnerable young people who are susceptible to extremists.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-18-commons.u176	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-18	Javid, Sajid	Threat management against extremists	2019-02-18 00:00:00	2019-02-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-lords	My Lords, health and care workers can now be reimbursed for the immigration health surcharge. While this is unlikely to fill the gap identified by the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, it is welcome. How are the Government ensuring that all care workers who do not work in large hospitals are aware of their right to the refund, and how are they monitoring what percentage of those eligible are making the claim and what sort of establishment they work in?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-lords.u13	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-07	Walmsley, Joan	Health workers' surcharge refund awareness	2020-10-07 00:00:00	2020-10-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons	Of the Government’s planned six nuclear sites, so far we have the most expensive plan in the world at Hinkley, Toshiba has walked away from Moorside, and now Hitachi is giving up on Wylfa and Oldbury. Instead of relying on a Chinese state company to deliver the remining two nuclear sites, is it time for the Government to follow the private sector and ditch that outdated technology?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons.u139	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-29	Brown, Alan	Abandon costly nuclear projects	2020-09-29 00:00:00	2020-09-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons	I absolutely do. My hon. Friend and many other Opposition Members have been fantastic champions of the WASPI women. I pay tribute to the WASPI women—in my time as a Member of Parliament, I do not think that I have come across a more co-ordinated, invigorated group. Those who attended in Govan should be left in no doubt that we know that they have not gone away and that they will not go away until justice is done As far as the Scottish National party is concerned, the Government stand accused of deliberately widening the gaps in the social safety net. If they push on with the final year of the benefit freeze, they will do so in the full and certain knowledge that those gaps will get wider. As they widen, low-income families, children, the sick, the working poor, the unemployed, the vulnerable and disabled people will continue to fall through that net—the collateral damage in the Government’s ideological crusade to seek to balance their books on the backs of the weakest in our society. I believe that, along with the catastrophic Brexit that we are about to face, entrenching poverty across the UK will be this Government’s legacy. I reiterate that these cuts are not a necessity. This is a political choice. These cuts are simply ideological Almost two years ago, the Prime Minister said famously, in response to a nurse who asked why she and her colleagues had not been given a pay rise, that “there isn’t a magic money tree that we can shake that suddenly provides for everything that people want” Really? No magic money tree? You could have fooled me, because as far as I can see, there always seems to be a magic money tree handy when the Prime Minister needs £1.6 billion to bribe English MPs to back her appalling Brexit deal. There always seems to be one when her Government need to find £1 billion to buy off the Democratic Unionist party in order to keep themselves in power. Of course, there is always a magic money tree around when the historically hopeless Transport Secretary needs to be bailed out when he—as we know he will—messes things up again. Perhaps a more accurate answer to that nurse would have been, “Of course there’s magic money tree but not for the likes of you and those others who need it most. ” Perhaps an even more honest answer would have been, “Of course there’s a magic money true, and you and the millions of people across the UK hammered by this Government for almost a decade are that money magic tree,” because the billions of pounds taken from the poorest and most vulnerable in our society have gone to bankroll much of the Government’s programme, and it has left deep wounds across many communities in the United Kingdom.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons.u608	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-04	O'Hara, Brendan	Government criticized for benefit cuts	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-20-commons	All of us in the House are concerned with workers’ rights and, indeed, the rights of those who are approaching retirement. The Leader of the Opposition put his policy to the British people, inasmuch as anyone could discern it, in a general election. He was slaughtered. What bit of that message does he not understand?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-20-commons.u33	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-12-20	Francois, Mark Gino	Workers' rights critiquing opposition policy	2019-12-20 00:00:00	2019-12-20 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-lords	My Lords, these regulations underpin the Government’s intent to ensure that transmission of the virus is halted by maintaining fully up-to-date information for the track and trace system on who has come into contact with a person who has tested positive for Covid-19. This is an admirable aim, but some questions remain over the robustness of the overall system for tracking people and with regard to privacy First, on the catastrophic failure of the IT system that transfers the positive test result data over to the track and trace system, as case numbers began to rise far more than it could cope with, the system failed at the first hurdle due to the larger volumes. If this part of the track and trace system is also predicated on the same legacy Excel software as that of the positive-case data, it is entirely possible for that to fail too, causing many people not to be contacted early enough, or even at all, if a glitch goes unnoticed. Is this part of the tracing system underpinned by software in the same way as the positive-case data software? Are there any in-built warning signals to alert authorities if this system fails to deliver My second point is on the validity of any data stored, given the reports that some people are not leaving their correct details with venues. What is happening to follow this through in order to ensure that people are properly traced? Also, given that some venues are not asking for information directly but leaving it up to customers to comply, the system does not appear robust enough. If a venue does not store that data, there is no way in which the Government are going to know that a person has been there, unless they are a positive case, in order to find the business guilty of failing in its legal duty My third point is on privacy. While the Government require venues to keep information only for 21 days, what measures are in place to protect citizens from data loss and breaches of privacy, so that they can have faith in using the system?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-lords.u113	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-07	Loomba, Rajinder Paul	Track and trace system concerns	2020-10-07 00:00:00	2020-10-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords	My Lords, what thought have the Government given to introducing ring-fenced bank accounts for major government projects delivered by the private sector, so that subcontractors are guaranteed prompt payment and do not have to worry about the main contractor’s financial health? I understand that the policy is supported by the Federation of Small Businesses and was recently adopted by the Welsh Government. As an example of the problem, before its collapse Carillion’s average payment time was 43 days—with some firms waiting up to 120 days for payment—despite it signing the Prompt Payment Code and being subject to the Public Contracts Regulations.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-19-lords.u103	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-19	Shipley, John Warren	Guaranteeing prompt payment for subcontractors	2019-06-19 00:00:00	2019-06-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-lords	My Lords, do the Government accept the evidence from jurisdictions that have changed the law? A recent paper from Holland shows that a majority of Dutch physicians feel pressure when dealing with requests for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, and their confidential survey shows a mismatch of many thousands more between euthanasias and assisted suicides and the reported figures. In Belgium there are estimates that up to 50% may not be reported. It is on the basis of the danger to those who can be pressurised that many people feel that a change in the law is too dangerous to contemplate.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-lords.u25	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Finlay, Ilora Gillian	Reject law change for euthanasia	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons	As someone who has bought numerous furniture items from IKEA and spent frustrating hours putting them together, I understand the IKEA furniture concept. Does the hon. Lady agree that the potential loss of 352 jobs is horrific, and that there must be an onus on a chain store as large as IKEA to go the extra mile by placing members of staff in other stores or ensuring that they are trained for new jobs? It is not enough to just up sticks with a “too bad, too sad” attitude; that just will not be accepted.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons.u359	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-13	Shannon, Richard James	Protect IKEA worker jobs	2020-02-13 00:00:00	2020-02-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-commons	After a 10-year campaign for station improvement, local residents in Kidsgrove finally secured funding under Access for All for an accessible bridge and an extended car park. Problems with Network Rail have delayed the project, meaning that the car park is now delayed. The car park programme is overseen by East Midlands Trains and will go over the franchise date. Can the Minister assure me that the change in franchise will not affect my car park?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-commons.u215	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-11	Smeeth, Ruth Lauren	Concerns over delayed car park	2019-04-11 00:00:00	2019-04-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons	I am always happy to meet colleagues from across the House if they have particular constituency issues or if people who really need support are falling between the cracks. There are three different schemes available to support people, and we are talking about two of them today. I would be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to explore those issues and to discuss the three compensation programmes to see whether there is more that we can do. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that people get the support to which they are entitled We expect to see a decline in the number of people being diagnosed with diffuse mesothelioma in the coming years, but many people will continue to develop the condition and the other respiratory diseases, based on their exposure, for some time to come. That is why the Government are committed to working in partnership with their arm’s length bodies and agencies to improve the lives of those with respiratory diseases. I want to give the House an example of that commitment Last summer, I hosted a lung health summit, bringing together the Union of Democratic Mineworkers, my hon. Friends the Members for Sherwood (Mark Spencer) and for Mansfield (Ben Bradley) and representatives from the British Lung Association and the NHS. This was an opportunity to discuss the important work that the Government and our partners are doing and to listen to the first-hand experiences and problems, brought to my attention by my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood, that miners are encountering today as they try to get an appropriate diagnosis and therefore the financial support that we want them to receive A huge amount of work has been done as a result of that lung health summit, and I was delighted—as I hope everyone will be—to see that the recently published NHS long-term plan recognises the objective of improving outcomes for people with respiratory disease. The long-term plan sets out how the NHS will take action in a number of areas. This includes expanding programmes that support earlier diagnosis of respiratory diseases—including the pioneering lung health checks trialled in Manchester and Liverpool—and increasing access to proven treatments such as pulmonary rehabilitation. As part of the engagement process for the Government’s long-term plan, an NHS England respiratory oversight group has been created, which includes membership of the British Lung Foundation. In addition, NHS England has been working closely with the taskforce for lung health, which has also recently published its own five-year plan to improve lung health I want to take a few moments to talk about the work of the Health and Safety Executive in this regard. It does excellent work, the length and breadth of the country, but we seldom have an opportunity to reflect on that in this House. As a nation, we should be really proud of our long history of trying to prevent illness and injury at work. The very first factory inspectors were appointed under the Factory Act 1833 to prevent injury and overworking among child textile workers, and we have come a long way since then. The Health and Safety at Work etc.. Act came into force in October 1974 and the Health and Safety Executive was formed in January 1975. The HSE is now well established as a mature regulator with a mission to prevent work-related death, injury and ill health. This is borne out by the most recent published HSE statistics, which show a long-term downward trend in the rate of self-reported non-fatal accidents and fatal accidents to workers. Indeed, the UK consistently has one of the lowest standardised rates of fatal injury when compared with any other large economy Turning back to the importance of these regulations, I am sure we all agree that, while no amount of money can ever compensate individuals or their families for the suffering and loss caused by the diffuse mesothelioma and pneumoconiosis covered by the 1979 Act scheme, those who have those diseases rightly deserve some form of monetary compensation. Finally, I am required to confirm to the House that these provisions are compatible with the European convention on human rights, and I am happy so to do.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons.u187	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-06	Newton, Sarah Louise	Support for respiratory disease compensation	2019-02-06 00:00:00	2019-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	My hon. Friend takes the words straight out of my mouth. Colleagues will recall the collapse of Flybe in March, which was devastating for its employees, many of whom live in Exeter and East Devon Despite Government intervention and offers of assistance, Flybe shareholders chose to walk away from an airline that they signed up to support. It was a punch in the gut to regional connectivity, and the impact is still felt in East Devon and across the south-west. Although some form of Flybe routes from Exeter airport have been brought back to life by new airlines, the future of these routes remains on a knife edge. Back in March, a review of air passenger duty was announced as part of a package of measures to support Flybe and regional connectivity by air. Many colleagues welcomed this move to level the playing field by ensuring that regional airlines were not hampered by having to pay APD twice. It is essential that the Government use all the tools at their disposal to ensure a fair and level playing field for operators such as Loganair and Blue Islands, which operate from Exeter airport After months of engagement with the aviation industry, I hope that the Government are actively considering scrapping business rates for airports for 12 months, with Government support making up the difference to local authorities that would feel the pinch. Airports in England have paid more than £17 million in business rates since the start of the lockdown in March, despite passenger numbers dropping by around 97%. In response to the Transport Committee’s inquiry, the Government said that discussions on business rates were ongoing with airports. I urge the Government to speed up discussions and offer solutions that support the future of regional aviation because we will not be able to level up our regions if we level off regional connectivity.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u396	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Jupp, Simon James	Support regional aviation connectivity	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons	I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point. I was going to mention the people’s vote, because that is where I fundamentally disagree with the hon. Lady. Apparently, the Liberal Democrats want a people’s vote, although we are now hearing that their position may be moving towards straightforward revocation. The irony is that they have said that if there were another vote and that vote was to leave, they would not abide by it: they would not accept it. Is that democratic? Is it democratic for the Liberal Democrats to say, “Let us have another vote, but if we do not like the result, we will not accept it. ” ?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons.u477	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-09	Tomlinson-Mynors, Michael James	Hypocrisy of Liberal Democrats	2019-09-09 00:00:00	2019-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-commons	Yes, indeed. I sometimes find that Lewis Carroll has some very useful ways of putting things. There was the famous exchange between Alice and Humpty Dumpty, in which Humpty Dumpty says: “Words mean what you choose them to mean. The question is who is to be master, that is all. ” Words can be used in all kinds of different ways to try to justify propositions that are unsustainable I say with respect, but none the less very firmly, that in this particular case it is absolutely clear that when the decision has been taken by the British people—the voters—in the referendum and has then been endorsed by an Act of Parliament and a whole series of other Acts of Parliament, including section 38, it really is not down to the unelected House of Lords to resist it on the scale that they have, and to claim that they can override the House of Commons. We have just had a whole series of agreements and disagreements going backwards and forwards on the UKIM Bill alone As Lord Bingham made absolutely and abundantly clear in chapter 12 of his magisterial book “The Rule of Law”, it is for Parliament to make law and pass Acts of Parliament; it is not for the judges to intervene, to seek to make law and to impugn the sovereignty of Parliament. Anyone who wants to get the full flavour of it should read chapter 12 of “The Rule of Law”, because it is the most explicit and clear statement that one could possibly imagine.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-commons.u301	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-15	Cash, William Nigel Paul	Parliament sovereignty over House of Lords	2020-12-15 00:00:00	2020-12-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons	I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the next episode in the not-so-thrilling franchise, “Business for next week”. Thank goodness there are only two weeks left to endure this purgatory. I have to say that the Leader of the House’s holiday bus gets more and more appealing and alluring, and I would even be prepared to endure all his rotten jokes if we could just escape this oblivion for the summer Thankfully, the Tories’ pointless leadership contest is at last coming to an end, as the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson) will soon secure his coronation. Last week both candidates were in Perth in my constituency telling me that they were going to put me on the run and take the run out of Runrig. The only thing running in Perthshire are the votes of soft Tory voters and Tory remainers, appalled at the prospect of this buffoon’s Brexit Mr Speaker, we are now at least on our way to stopping them proroguing Parliament and suspending democracy to get their no-deal Brexit through. The Government are now obliged to issue a bi-weekly report to Parliament from October, and that should just about be enough to see off these democracy-wreckers. We have Lords amendments scheduled for next Thursday, and I think we are all anticipating the Government to get up to their usual tricks and try and thwart that progress, but my plea to the Leader of the House is: just leave it alone. Let’s do what we can to stop the suspension of democracy and deny them the opportunity to suspend Parliament. Democracy must triumph, and if the Government do try to thwart that progress, we will find other ways to ensure that this Parliament is sovereign and retains its say Lastly, we do not have the business for the next two weeks any more, as was usual—a feature that I think should be returned—so we do not know whether in the last week the Prime Minister will be able to test whether he has the confidence of this House. I am just about to introduce a Bill that would mean that it was this House that would confirm the new Prime Minister and test whether he did indeed have the confidence of this House. Surely it should be this Parliament that decides the next Prime Minister, not 100,000 Tory members with all their curious and right-wing views. It is what we do in Scotland, and it should happen here Week by week, this House drifts further away from democracy. It is time that this House started to take back control.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons.u226	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-11	Wishart, Peter	Opposing Government actions, advocating democracy	2019-07-11 00:00:00	2019-07-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	I thank the Minister for that answer. It is unacceptable that many people, including the disabled constituent of mine she referred to, have suffered at the hands of aggressive bailiffs, who seem to think that they are above the law. Debt collectors and debt advice charities are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, but bailiffs are an anomaly in all this and do not have independent regulation. I hear what she says about the timetable, but when the Government do respond to the call for evidence and the Justice Committee report, will that include plans for an independent regulator of bailiffs?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u92	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Reynolds, Emma Elizabeth	Independent regulator for bailiffs	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-lords	My noble friend makes a very reasonable point. The marketplace for vaccines is extremely competitive. The British Government have been emphatic in our commitment to CEPI, Gavi and the other vaccine organisations. The COVAX advance market commitment aims to produce 1 billion doses for high-risk populations in 92 developing countries in 2021. We support that initiative enormously and work with other partners to ensure the fair and equitable distribution of vaccines around the world.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-lords.u103	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-11	Bethell, James	Support for global vaccine distribution	2020-11-11 00:00:00	2020-11-11 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-commons	I join with others in strongly welcoming the Foreign Secretary’s decisive action today in creating a bespoke route to citizenship for the BNOs and their dependants, but can he reassure me that he will continue to take our unique responsibility to those in Hong Kong deeply seriously and continue to stand on the side of all those who are seeking democracy and freedom?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-commons.u178	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-01	Coutinho, Claire Coryl Julia	Support for BNO citizenship route	2020-07-01 00:00:00	2020-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons	In a recent report, the Children’s Commissioner highlighted the risk that young people in care were put in when they go into unregulated and mostly unsupported accommodation, and called for a ban on that. One of the things that they are at risk of is being preyed upon and drawn into county lines activity. Will the Minister speak to her colleagues in the Department for Education, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to see whether they can support my Bill which aims to outlaw this?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons.u89	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-14	McCarthy, Kerry Gillian	Ban unregulated care accommodations	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons	When it is safe to do so, I would love to visit and see the work of RCS. I pay tribute to the great work it is doing in its community. We understand the role of good mental wellbeing and helping individuals into the job market, and in Wales we have provided £1.3 million to test the new individual placement and support. We also provide contracted employment support programmes specifically tailored to disabled people and people with long-term health conditions, as well as administering the Access to Work scheme and the Disability Confident campaign.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons.u116	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-29	Tomlinson, Justin Paul	Supporting mental health employment initiatives	2020-06-29 00:00:00	2020-06-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-07-lords	My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, for bringing this Bill back with some amendments, which have undoubtedly strengthened the one that we debated in this House in June last year For far too long, patients across England have been victims of a system of palliative care that lacks not only consistency but the resources to help them. I join noble Lords in being delighted that the Government have announced that they will provide £25 million for hospice and palliative care services, but I am concerned that the Library briefing tells us that the purpose of this investment is to “help keep facilities open and ‘improve’ the quality of end-of-life care”, as that is well below the target of this Bill. The Bill seeks to absolutely mainstream palliative care throughout the country. Given the debate and the comments from expert colleagues in the House today, I am sure that if that happens, money will be saved in the acute hospital system as well. What is not to like Noble Lords have covered an enormous amount of ground. From the Liberal Democrat Benches I confirm that we consider virtually all the Bill to be important and correct, and it certainly needs to be found a space so that it becomes legislation. I urge the Government, and particularly the Minister, to move us forward from the statement on 29 October that the Government would work with patients, families, local authorities and voluntary sector partners to ensure equity of access to general and specialist palliative care throughout England. My grandmother often used to say, “Fine words butter no parsnips”, and the problem with that statement is that you cannot ensure that equity of access unless the resources are there to support it. Therefore, I apologise to the Minister because, once again, I am going to say that we must have the resources to enable the Government to deliver on their extremely strong words. Let us make sure that Clause 1 is enacted as fast as possible Your Lordships will know that I have a particular interest in palliative care services for babies, children and young people. The briefing from Together for Short Lives has a brilliant opening statement: “If passed by parliament, this bill would help to overcome many of the barriers children and families face. This bill could also help to make sure that parents of seriously ill children and the professionals and services caring for them resolve conflicts about what is in a child’s best interests by mediation and not in court” Hear, hear—we on these Benches echo that, as does the British Medical Association The Liberal Democrats have long sought to fund palliative care and the hospice movement through NHS funding, so we are pleased to support Clause 1 in its entirety. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, for putting back on the face of the Bill the stronger form of the legal duty for the relevant bodies—“appropriate health services”—to provide and commission palliative care and psychological supports for patients and their families. That is extremely welcome There is still no method of accountability to ensure that CCGs and other health bodies serve patients to the best of their ability. The situation is begging for a catalyst that will empower CCGs and hold them to account in the work that they do. Your Lordships know that I have spoken often about the position of parents with young children in Hertfordshire who need palliative care. We saw a CCG close the respite care centre 100 yards down the road from my house without making arrangements elsewhere for these children. Eighteen months after the provision closed, the alternative beds have only just opened 20 miles away in Hertfordshire, but these beds do not in any way replace the ones that were closed. The standard of variation between the lowest and highest budgets allocated for some patients by CCGs is extraordinary. No patient deserves to receive care so lacking that it is not palliative care at all Focusing again on children and young people, the provision in the Bill regarding pharmacies is important. However, we remember that NICE has stated that children with life-limiting conditions should be cared for by multidisciplinary teams. Together for Short Lives has found through its surveys that across England this is sometimes, rarely or never the case. It talks about a number of other facilities but there is not time this afternoon to go through them all However, I want to point out one absolutely chronic problem for the children who require these services that has worsened considerably over the last six months. There is a major discrepancy between the services planned and funded between 8 am and 6.30 pm from Monday to Friday, and services commissioned to provide care outside those hours. Some 93% of clinical commissioning groups commission community children’s nursing teams but only 67% provide out-of-hours care. This has resulted in parents frequently having to call an ambulance to take their child to A&E—the last place these children need to be—to have their feeding tube reinserted. This is so short-sighted; it needs to be remedied Nikki Lancaster, mother to Lennon, who died nearly two years ago, said: “Nine to five, my community nurses were amazing, but come five o’clock in the evening, you’re very alone. It’s a massively overwhelming responsibility keeping a child alive. When you’re out there on your own and you’ve got no support it’s hard—emotionally hard. If you were in hospital, it would be a consultant making those decisions. When you are at home, it’s you. ” Following the death of her son Lennon, Nikki Lancaster faced the other problem that bereaved parents in receipt of benefits face: she got absolutely no benefits from the day he died because they were all linked to his care. During the passage of the parental bereavement Bill, I specifically asked the Minister to talk to DWP to make sure there was comparable provision for parents who had had to give up work to look after their chronically or terminally ill children. That has not happened. So, while we celebrate the parental bereavement Act, there is unfortunately a cohort of parents who are still being left high and dry Like other noble Lords, I had a problem with Clause 2(4). I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, for his comments about mediation, which were excellent. Before I came into the Chamber today, I was thinking, “An ACAS for the NHS and patients”; the noble Lord absolutely got that point. The noble Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, has taken most of the wind out of my sails but, as somebody who has been a UNICEF trustee, I point out that Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child says: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. ” The problem with Clause 2(4) is that, no matter how loving the parents are, their views should not come before the interests of the children. That is why I very much welcome the family courts using children’s guardians to make sure that the voice of the child is heard, particularly in the case of very small children, who have no voice of their own Another, related issue, concerning teenagers, was briefly touched on. I am reminded of the importance of the Gillick competence. What do we do about teenagers, or perhaps even younger children, who could consent to and fully understand the medical treatment proposed? Which would come first—the Gillick competence or the relevant clause in the Bill? I am delighted that my noble friend Lady Jolly has proposed an amendment for Committee stage. I am not quite sure that I support it in its entirety; I do not believe that it passes my two tests of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Gillick competence. But I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, will be open to discussing how we might best improve the Bill to ensure support and satisfaction for parents who are clearly suffering at an extraordinarily difficult time, and support for the rights of the child, which must always remain paramount I hope that this Bill will have further space in the Government’s schedule and, even if it does not, that it is sufficiently high up in the system. Please can the House authorities make sure that it is scheduled swiftly for Committee and subsequent stages? I hope the Minister can reassure us that there will be more than £25 million available for palliative care, and that the Government will take to heart the detail of this Bill in seeking to mainstream palliative care and ensure that it is available for absolutely everybody in this country who needs it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-07-lords.u58	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-07	Brinton, Sarah Virginia	Support for palliative care bill	2020-02-07 00:00:00	2020-02-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	I shall follow the theme expounded by the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, and talk about Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. It will come as no surprise to noble Lords that with a name such as mine I have family in Ireland, but more importantly, I had several meetings with Irish Health Ministers during my time as Minister and I want to provide insight and reassurance from those conversations. Noble Lords will understand that during those conversations we had to discuss difficult issues—more challenging topics, shall we say—within the Brexit realm, but there was absolute clarity in every meeting about the intended outcome being continued cross-border delivery and co-ordination of healthcare. That could be done under the aegis of the common travel area and the Belfast agreement and there was no reason for the fact of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union to interrupt that. Clearly that needed to be established as well as the legal processes and basis, but that was deep, long-standing and productive work I wonder whether the Minister can update the Committee to give a flavour of where we have got to; it is not just about the Republic and the north, as people from the Republic of Ireland use tertiary healthcare services in the UK. This is an incredibly deep and long-standing relationship with huge benefits, and I am sure that the Minister will be able to confirm that we are at the right point in those discussions to provide reassurance. I can tell her that it has always been the intention of the UK Government, and it was clearly the intention of the Irish Government, to achieve that Perhaps I may reflect briefly on the amendments in the name of my noble friend Lord Lansley, which in a sense are about clarifying who benefits. I absolutely agree that that is necessary, and I am sure that the Minister will be able to respond I shall risk partially agreeing with the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, and my noble friend Lord Dundee in the sense that they make a very strong case for our agreement with the European Union incorporating pensioners and those with long-term conditions, as indeed is the case now. I do not think that that needs to be in the Bill, not least because their amendments include the word “preserves”. Of course, these are ongoing and dynamic relationships that will change over time; nevertheless, that is the Government’s objective The noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, made a very compelling case for the Bill having a global reach when he talked about those with long-term conditions being unable to travel outside the EU because the arrangements are not in place. I hope that that is a sign that there might be agreement across the aisle about how it is necessary to formulate these agreements so that when our people travel to Australia, New Zealand, Serbia, Gibraltar, Guernsey and other places, they are able to do so with the same kind of reassurance with which they are able to travel in Europe now.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u173	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	O’Shaughnessy, James	Health cooperation post-Brexit reassurance	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and I agree with him In Labour’s first Opposition day debate after the 2016 referendum, we called on the Government to unilaterally guarantee the rights of EU nationals. If the Government had done this, we could have avoided the situation where, four months before we face a cliff edge, millions of EU citizens are still in limbo The SNP supported our amendment to the immigration Bill, which would make settled status a declaratory system, so EU citizens living in the UK would be automatically granted settled status, rather than having to apply for it. In rejecting a declaratory scheme, the Government often make the argument that the process in 1973 for the Windrush generation was declaratory, so we should make people apply to avoid a repeat of Windrush. I believe that that argument shows the Government have learned the wrong lessons from Windrush The Government are saying that Windrush people were illegally detained and deported, because they did not have the proper papers to prove they were in the UK legally. With EU citizens, the Government have decided to create a situation where people will still be detained and deported, but that will be legal because they have not applied for settled status in time. Just as the Government are not fulfilling their obligations to EU citizens, they are not fulfilling their humanitarian obligations to refugees The Prime Minister has consistently failed the most vulnerable child refugees. Even when forced to resettle children under the Dubs amendment, the Government closed the scheme after just 480 children had been resettled, rather than the 3,000 originally envisioned. Despite repeated calls from non-governmental organisations and MPs and a vote on the Floor of the House, the Government have failed to expand refugee family reunion. These rules have been under review for over a year. They do not require legislation to be enacted, and they would make an immeasurable difference to the lives of refugees in the UK. As we move beyond the failures of the past, we must start building an idea of what new immigration policy will meet the needs of our economy and build prosperity In December, the Government published a White Paper on immigration. Their own economic analysis predicts that the proposals would cost between £2 billion and £4 billion over the first five years. The proposed £30,000 salary threshold, in particular, would severely limit access to labour that many sectors in our economy desperately need. Take social care. The health and social care sector is dealing with serious workforce shortages, while demand is increasing. Across the UK, four in five European economic area employees working full-time in social care would have been ineligible to work in the UK under the proposed system. In Scotland, less than 10% of those in caring personal service occupations earn above £25,000, and none earns £30,000 Labour and the SNP agree on our diagnosis of a broken immigration system. However, we do not agree entirely on the cure. The SNP has argued for a devolved immigration system, where Scotland is given the power to determine its own immigration rules. We believe this approach would be unenforceable, because there would be no way to distinguish between those who have a visa under the Scottish system and those who have a visa for the rest of the UK. We would either need visa checks along Hadrian’s Wall or we would have to rely on the hostile environment. Neither option is acceptable. Under a Labour Government, a devolved immigration system would be unnecessary. Our immigration system will be flexible and based on the needs of our economy, including Scotland’s, not on bogus migration targets In conclusion, the Prime Minister’s legacy will be a cruel and hostile immigration policy, which has harmed our economy and caused the Windrush crisis. Whoever is our next Prime Minister, they must commit to ending the hostile environment and introduce a 28-day time limit on immigration detention.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-26-commons.u240	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-26	Khan, Mohammed Afzal	Critique of Government immigration policy	2019-06-26 00:00:00	2019-06-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons	The UK internal market is about preserving jobs across the United Kingdom. It is about making sure that investment can come in, confident in the knowledge that we have a level playing field—an internal market in which businesses can sell services and products across the United Kingdom The right hon. Gentleman talks about the powers that will be coming back at the end of this year—at the end of the transition period. It will be the biggest transfer of powers in the history of devolution. I do, though, agree with him that it is not going to be 70 powers coming back to Scotland; I think it is closer to 111. His colleagues in the Scottish Parliament will have an opportunity to set rules and regulations. The problem, of course, is that SNP Members are not interested in that—they are not interested in taking control; they are interested in being ruled by the European Union. The right hon. Gentleman should spend more time talking to businesses and to people whose jobs would be at risk if we did not have this seamless internal market in the United Kingdom Finally, the right hon. Gentleman talks about standards. I have already explained to the right hon. Member for Doncaster North (Edward Miliband) that we have some of the highest standards in the world, and we are not going to compromise on that. The right hon. Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Ian Blackford) talks about wanting to have a dialogue. I respectfully remind him that it was the Scottish Government who walked away from the discussion that we were having on the UK internal market last year, so, in the spirit of co-operation, I hold out my hand to him and say, “Let us talk. Let us continue the discussion. Come back to us on the consultation and continue to work with us on the common frameworks programme. ”	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons.u266	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-16	Sharma, Alok Kumar	UK internal market, devolution powers	2020-07-16 00:00:00	2020-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-lords	My Lords, I welcome this timely debate, moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Massey of Darwen, on the funding of public services for young adults. It is now apparent that funding for this work has reduced substantially over the last few years. Local authorities are responsible for the delivery of services to this sector, and the reduction in their grants from central government is the main problem. Local authorities are trying very hard to continue the services they have to deliver. Let us not forget that we are talking about the future generations of this country: our children and grandchildren. Lack of sufficient funding is leading to all kinds of problems: increasing drug-taking, early pregnancy, delinquency at schools and many other ills. Disadvantaged, poor and single-parent families suffer disproportionately. BAME communities also have increasing pressures. Schools, both primary and secondary, are constantly short of funds. I have heard about children coming to school in the morning hungry and in some cases with dirty clothes. For the first time, the number of BAME young people in prisons has increased in comparison with white people. Facilities such as sports grounds, Sure Start centres and clubs for the young are being reduced or closed The root cause of all these serious problems is surely connected not only to a lack of funding but to poverty. An increasing number of poor families in some parts of the UK are dependent on food banks I have been involved for many years in early childhood education. I would like to share my experiences with your Lordships today. In 1967, while I was in Tanzania, I was the administrator of many schools, including a number of nursery schools. My colleagues felt that there was a great need to improve the standards of nursery school teachers. We undertook research and found that the Montessori system was one of the best at that time I remember meeting the grandson of Maria Montessori, Mr Mario Montessori, in Amsterdam. I was able to persuade him to send a teacher training expert to train the teachers in Tanzania. A lady, Miss Muriel Dwyer from England, was sent to Dar es Salaam for a period of one or two years. Her work was excellent and she managed to train some 40 teachers in the method of the Montessori system. Equipment for the new set-up was ordered from Holland and the Montessori system spread to the rest of the east African countries. It improved the standard of education for the young at a very early age. Science has shown us that a child leams quickly and properly between the ages of three and five Many years later, in 1972, when I migrated to the UK, I was invited to join the board of trustees of another NGO called the HighScope Educational Research Foundation, in Ypsilanti in Michigan. I was able to witness the enormous change that made in the lives of the children. HighScope had carried out a 25-year longitudinal study of two groups; namely, those who were trained under the HighScope system and those who were not The study proved that for every $1 that the Government of the USA spent on early childhood education, they saved $7 over the coming years. Delinquency and early pregnancy rates were reduced and children were more likely to be highly educated and with higher earning power, and they were better able to ensure a good education from early childhood to university for their own children. I was able to persuade the director of HighScope to establish a similar system in the UK. We must have intervention in our education system for resources for early childhood education in the UK. It will save money in the long term. My own instinct is that many successful people over the years have sent their children to private nursery schools to prepare them for their education in the long term. But those who are poor are unable to send their young children to a private nursery school Science tells us that a child between the ages of three and five learns quickly when given the opportunity to learn from good teachers. The state does not provide early childhood education for all young children as a statutory right. The time has come for the state to introduce early childhood education for all as a policy. Will the Minister tell the House what level of funding is being provided for early childhood education and whether all children aged three to five receive the benefit of early childhood education as a right? If that is not the case, will the Minister please bring in legislation that makes early childhood education compulsory for all?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-lords.u142	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-18	Bhatia, Amirali	Increase funding for early education	2019-07-18 00:00:00	2019-07-18 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP		Non-affiliated	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-08-commons	That is an excellent point. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his passion on Cameroon, and I know that a number of colleagues share concerns, which the Government of Cameroon understand. We regularly engage with a number of partners, including the French and Americans, and the UN, where there have been resolutions. I intend to travel to Paris, covid permitting, in the next few months to discuss areas of mutual interest across the continent where we can work together, and Cameroon will be high on that list.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-08-commons.u35	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-08	Duddridge, James Philip	Cameroon concerns and collaboration	2020-09-08 00:00:00	2020-09-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson), who served with me on the Brexit Committee in the previous Parliament and had great insight and passion for this cause. He is absolutely right in saying that the Government were warned about the dangers involved in the Irish protocol. Indeed, many members of the Committee pointed that out, but he was foremost among them Having listened to the Prime Minister’s cogent analysis of where we are, I can see why we have this Bill before us, because what he really said is that the EU is not complying with its duty under EU law of sincere co-operation, which it still has until the end of December. By not sincerely co-operating, it is forcing the Government to anticipate what ghastly things might happen. They are very wise so to do, because of course the European Union has form in all this. As Charles Moore said in a recent article in The Daily Telegraph: “The breaking of international law is a sport at which the EU itself often excels. ” I want to remind the House of an episode not referred to in Charles Moore’s article but based on my experience when I was chairman of the Legal Affairs and Human Rights Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Members will recall that the European Union agreed under article 6(2) of the treaty of Lisbon that it would accede to the European convention on human rights. Has it done so? No, it has not. It is in breach of international law. It is showing that it does not respect the rule of law. What is its defence? Its defence is its own interpretation of an obscure protocol attached to the Lisbon treaty—protocol No. 8. The European Union’s interpretation is not the interpretation that normal people would put on those words, but it got the support of the European Court of Justice—its own tame Court of Justice—to say that it would be incompatible with the European treaties for the European Union to accede to the European convention on human rights, which it had already decided to do during a prolonged negotiation in the preparation for the treaty Where are we now? We are in a situation where the Council of Europe’s parliamentary committee, the Council of Europe itself, and the European Parliament are trying to negotiate a way round this issue. In so doing, they are trying to exercise common sense and good will, because they recognise that the EU argument is essentially one of sovereignty. The EU is saying, “We do not want to subordinate our sovereignty to the European convention on human rights. ” The argument in the Bill is that if the EU carries out all its threats, it will destroy the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom and deprive us of the opportunity to administer for the whole United Kingdom with internal trade arrangements. If one is sympathetic to the idea that we should negotiate things with common sense and good will, that applies to the EU accession to the European convention on human rights, as well as to where we go from here to ensure that we get the full Brexit for which the people voted.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons.u297	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-14	Chope, Christopher Robert	EU breaches international law	2020-09-14 00:00:00	2020-09-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons	I am particularly glad that my very distinguished hon. Friend has participated in this part of our proceedings. He has not, though he is an assiduous attender of debates, ever had the horror of having to listen to me on this subject because he has not been present when I have been speaking about it, but I have tried to say to those who have been present on each occasion that the proposition he has just advanced is manifestly false, and the reason is this: the Order Paper of the House of Commons—this is the most ancient principle of our constitution as a matter of fact—is governed by the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, and those are the property of the House of Commons and nobody else. They are the property not of the Executive but of the House of Commons. The courts recognise that in the principle of comity and never interfere in the proceedings of our House. That principle goes back not to 1906 when the Government—in my view, improperly—instituted Standing Order 14 in its current form, but way back into the origins of Parliament. From the very beginning, Parliament sought to establish its right, through the Speaker and otherwise, to control its own proceedings, which is a very proper thing for Parliament to do. We have been driven to this only in an extreme emergency—that is how some of us see it, though I know that he takes a rather different view—and we are doing it in a perfectly proper way through the amendment of Standing Orders, which it lies open to this House to do.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons.u213	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-27	Letwin, Oliver	Order Paper governed by Parliament	2019-03-27 00:00:00	2019-03-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill) and I share a number of the assessments that he made in his contribution, because as the House pursues our debate on the Queen’s Speech, it is becoming ever more apparent that the casualty of a Tory Brexit will be Britain’s national health service. The NHS is our greatest national asset; it is the product of the fusion of radical and enlightened minds in the last century that gave us healthcare for all based on need, not means. But now, in this century, the NHS is in great peril from a toxic combination of chronic underfunding and withdrawal from the EU, and responding to very different challenges from those when it was first created so long ago Notwithstanding the announcements in the Queen’s Speech, let us be very clear that the NHS is not in receipt of the resources that it needs to be effective. That was discussed only yesterday at the Health and Social Care Committee, when we had with us the Secretary of State and we talked about the backlog of £6 billion in NHS repairs alone, so an announcement of half that really is no cause for celebration. We heard from the Health Foundation, and its assessment of the Queen’s Speech funding announcement says that “it falls well short of the scale of the challenge. ” We have a Prime Minister who announced 40 new hospitals, which then was downgraded to six within days, and we see demand for healthcare from our growing and ageing population outstripping the availability and quality of services, which means rationing and a diminution of quality of care; many right hon. and hon. Members from both sides of the House have referred to that in the debate this afternoon.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-commons.u460	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-23	Goldsmith (Berger), Luciana Clare	NHS endangered by Tory Brexit	2019-10-23 00:00:00	2019-10-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	I;LD	Independent;Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-02-lords	My Lords, it is my understanding that, although people received those letters earlier in the year, shielding ended on 1 August. In relation to the test kits, there are initially 10 per school for school leaders to distribute to families or support staff who might have difficulty accessing a test either by post or by attending one of the mobile centres. Test results should be received within 24 hours and unfortunately not within the 10 minutes the noble Baroness suggested.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-02-lords.u146	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-02	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Shielding ended, test kits allocated	2020-09-02 00:00:00	2020-09-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-lords	As I say, the second advantage is that it would truncate uncertainty. That will unleash the investment that has been held up. We all agree that uncertainty is bad for business. That is the one negative thing that this long process has had, but ending it means that people will start investing either to take advantage of the opportunities or to cope with the difficulties The third advantage is that it will force Ireland, the European Union and the British Government to implement—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-lords.u321	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Lilley, Peter	Uncertainty reduction boosts investment	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons	The hon. Gentleman will recall that a few years ago the people of Scotland had the political freedom to choose whether or not they wanted to remain part of this Union and they made that decision. This Government have been given an overwhelming democratic mandate to make sure that delivering on the will of the British people is achieved. The British public had the freedom to choose to leave the EU and the freedom to appoint a Government to—get ready for it—get Brexit done. We must repay that trust and uphold that freedom, and this Bill will allow us to do just that. It is our duty to put the interests of the UK first, to secure our sovereignty, to control our borders, to protect the territorial integrity of the UK and to fundamentally empower the British people and create the best life possible for them. We must remember that all of us are here only on the command of our constituents, and this Bill is our chance to empower the Government to secure a brighter future for the people we represent.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons.u370	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-16	Fareham, Dehenna Sheridan	Empower UK citizens fulfill Brexit	2020-09-16 00:00:00	2020-09-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons	The hon. Member is quite right to raise county lines as an issue, and I will say more about that later in my speech. I, too, suffer from the county lines phenomenon in my constituency, but there is no silver bullet to this problem. It requires a 360-degree assault upon these gangs, but I will say more about that in a moment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-29-commons.u180	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-29	Malthouse, Christopher Laurie	County lines require comprehensive action	2020-01-29 00:00:00	2020-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons	Very kind of you, Mr Speaker. I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Clearly, she is right that we would prefer to have a deal. In the statement, she talked about alternative arrangements, which are based, it appears, on the Malthouse compromise details. May I remind my right hon. Friend that it is clear, behind closed doors, that UK Government officials and the EU recognise that what is currently in the backstop is unworkable and that they will therefore have to implement alternative arrangements? When she sits down with them to ask for that, could she now say that those alternative arrangements must reach a point of a deadline date and be bound legally, so that they cannot renege from that after we leave?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons.u192	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-26	Duncan Smith, George Iain	Alternative arrangements deadline legally bound	2019-02-26 00:00:00	2019-02-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-commons	I have been clear that the Government are committed to tackling the abhorrent practice of so-called gay-conversion therapy in the UK. As the Prime Minister reiterated earlier this week, this practice has no place in civilised society. Our action will be determined by research looking at how best to define conversion therapy, the scale of the issue, where it is happening and who it is happening to. When that research is complete, I will bring forward proposals to ban conversion therapy, making sure that our measures are effective so that no innocent people have to endure such tortuous practices.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-commons.u48	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-22	Truss, Elizabeth Mary	Commitment to ban gay-conversion therapy	2020-07-22 00:00:00	2020-07-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-05-lords	My Lords, in view of the rather underwhelming response so far, might it be wise for my noble friend to repeat that this is money going out from the Government to the towns and local communities? The key to its success will be the alacrity with which they formulate their plans and perhaps use that money as a catalyst to get funding from other quarters so that, as suggested by the noble Baroness, Lady Bull, there truly is a lasting effect.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-05-lords.u131	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-05	Haselhurst, Alan	Clarify community funding approach	2019-03-05 00:00:00	2019-03-05 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-commons	Like the Secretary of State, I will miss the hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth (Sarah Newton); she was working with me on my Access to Welfare (Terminal Illness Definition) Bill—a critical Bill at a time when the Scottish Government are consulting on new standards for clinicians to decide when someone is terminally ill. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss the Bill and move it forward?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-commons.u177	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-18	Moon, Madeleine	Discuss terminal illness definition bill	2019-03-18 00:00:00	2019-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons	My hon. Friend was absolutely right last week to raise the issue of the so-called ghost flights; I think he was the first person to raise the matter in this House. I have since written both to the slots allocator in this country, Airport Coordination Limited, and to the European Commission, which has indicated that it will alleviate those slots to stop empty flights flying. My hon. Friend is also right about the pressure that the airlines are under, and we are doing further work with the Civil Aviation Authority and the EU, particularly over EU regulation 261. I would be very happy to meet him to discuss the matter.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons.u44	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-12	Shapps, Grant	Addressing ghost flights issue	2020-03-12 00:00:00	2020-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons	I can certainly tell the hon. Gentleman that the Government have absolutely no intention of returning to the A-word, which I will not quote. That is not going to be our approach. We do not think that will be necessary. What I can tell him is that we have already put another £3.2 billion, as he knows, into supporting local authorities and supporting some of the most vulnerable throughout this difficult time. We will continue to make sure that funding gets through to those who need it, but the crucial thing, as colleagues across the House will understand, is that the more effectively we can suppress this virus and the faster we can restart our economy, the better our chances, as everybody knows, of getting the funding that we all need to the poorest and neediest in our society. That is the course that this Government is going to follow.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons.u100	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-06	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	No return to austerity	2020-05-06 00:00:00	2020-05-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue and championing the campaign; I know that she has met Ministers to discuss it. We all agree that terminally ill people should not have to worry about their job, which is why the Dying to Work charter is so important and such a good example of supporting terminally ill workers. I am pleased to hear that the number of employees covered by the charter has now reached the 1 million mark. Employers are making commitments to their employees by signing the charter—that they will not be dismissed and that their families’ financial security will not be put at risk. I will ask a Minister to write to my hon. Friend about the related aspects of the disabilities Act and about looking at the issue in relation to legislation.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons.u129	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-01	May, Theresa Mary	Support for terminally ill workers	2019-05-01 00:00:00	2019-05-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-lords	My Lords, in 2010, when Labour left office, unemployment stood at 2.5 million. As my noble friend Lord Lupton has already noted, remarkably, every Labour Government have left office with unemployment higher than when they came into power. So I am very pleased today, a decade on from the worst recession since the 1930s, to welcome the latest employment figures It is clearly excellent news that at 76%, the employment rate is the joint highest on record, UK unemployment is at its lowest level since 1974 at 3.8%, and wages are rising higher than inflation, at their fastest rate for nearly a decade. Thanks to successive Conservative-led Governments, 3 million more people now enjoy the security of a job. According to the Office for National Statistics, the number of people in work is at the highest level since records began in 1971. By giving workers a pay rise through our national living wage, successive Conservative led-Governments have helped the UK economy recover Of course, there will be those who say that the increase in employment is down to the creation of part-time, unskilled work—but this is simply not borne out by the figures. More than 75% of the jobs created are in full-time work; only 3% of jobs are on zero-hours contracts, the exclusive terms of which the Government outlawed in 2015 A year later, the Government commissioned the Taylor review into the changing labour market. The June 2017 report stated that the UK was “good at creating jobs”, but that there were a number of, “persistent weaknesses in the UK labour market, particularly real wage growth and productivity performance”. The report proposed a seven-point plan which recommended that a British national strategy for work should be explicitly directed towards the goal of good work for all While applauding the Government’s positive reaction to the Taylor review, I shall focus on an area that the report does not cover so well. The Migration Advisory Committee produced a recent report pointing out major skills shortages in the UK economy which it believes cannot be filled by the UK workforce. It states that migration rules should be relaxed. It believes that the shortage occupation list, whereby jobs are effectively allowed to jump the queue for workers from outside the European Economic Area, needs a big expansion. The suggested MAC list would cover 9% of jobs in the labour market, compared to approximately 1% currently. Alan Manning, chairman of the MAC, said: “Today’s labour market is very different to the one we reviewed when the last SOL was published in 2013 … That is why we have recommended expanding the SOL to cover a range of occupations in health, information and engineering fields” The SOL is a useful reminder—an alarm bell, even—to government, industry and the education sector about the areas where the UK has a skills deficit. Some of the labour market shortages, particularly in engineering and health, have existed for decades and are clearly getting worse. It begs serious questions about the quantity and quality of technical and vocational training in the country, and whether enough thought has been given to planning for the long-term needs of the economy My noble friend Lord Bamford put the issue succinctly in his 2014 maiden speech. He compared the UK economy to that of Germany. Germany’s success, he said, was achieved, “by having a coherent, long-term industrial strategy and by focusing on high value-added products. They did it by spending more on R&D than we do—70% more … Germany did it by supporting family businesses under its Mittelstand model” We should do likewise in Britain, where family businesses provide more than 9 million jobs—far more than public companies. Finally, and crucially, Germany did it by showing a real commitment to technical education. My noble friend said: “Technical education is … especially dear to my heart. I believe that we have a duty to identify and nurture young talent”. —[Official Report, 10/6/14; col. 267. ] There is no better example of a successful family business in the UK than my noble friend Lord Bamford’s company, JCB, so he speaks with great authority Let us look at the current rules for non-EU citizens who wish to work or study in the UK. They need to apply for one of a number of visas. In my view, there are two main problems with the system. First, people now need to be paid at least £30,000 to apply for a tier 2 visa as an experienced, skilled worker; that figure is up almost £10,000 since 2011. This threshold appears senseless as it excludes skilled workers needed in quite a few job areas. Secondly, I understand that no tier 3 visas for unskilled workers are being given out at present. Will the Minister confirm this? Should there not be a shake-up in the tier 2 visa regime to allow shortages, for instance in the NHS, to be dealt with, and in the tier 3 visa regime to retain the seasonal workforce required by the agricultural industry, especially in the fruit and vegetable sectors? In summary, I praise the Conservative-led Governments since 2010 for reducing the unemployment rate so successfully. I also compliment them on the Taylor review and their sensible reaction to it, while noting the CBI’s concerns. I am cautious about job losses in the motor industry and in large companies such as BT, and about how much worse matters will get if there is a no-deal Brexit. Finally, the Government need to look at the shortage of skilled and unskilled workers, as well as at the hugely important issue of technical training.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-lords.u97	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-06	Baring, Francis Thomas	Conservatives reduced unemployment skills shortage	2019-06-06 00:00:00	2019-06-06 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords	The average times are not at my disposal, but I reassure the noble Baroness that more than half the results are turned around within 24 hours. Our target time is currently 48 hours and the vast majority of tests are done within that time. As the noble Lord, Lord Wood, rightly said, speed is of the essence, and we are working hard to compress those times.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords.u64	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-14	Bethell, James	Results within 48 hours target	2020-05-14 00:00:00	2020-05-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords	In my original Answer, I said it was very clear that people in work have a much better opportunity not to be in poverty. The noble Baroness raises the issue of lone parents, who have enormous issues to overcome. The Government are doing everything they can to make sure that people are supported, and the best route out of poverty for this group is to be in work.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords.u14	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Stedman-Scott, Deborah	Work combats poverty	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons	The right hon. Gentleman is correct, so I do not need to expand on that. I am conscious of your points about time, Madam Deputy Speaker, but he is correct in what he says I want to go through some of the senior military, legal and political opinion that has come out against the Bill. I can accept that Conservative Members, probably those on the Front Bench, think that the Opposition—if not the entirety of it, my party—are just Guardian-reading, lentil-munching sandal wearers, but that can hardly be laid at the feet of Nicholas Mercer, can it? Nicholas Mercer, the former command legal adviser during the Iraq war, has pointed out that this Bill “undermines international humanitarian law while shielding the government” The Bill serves one body, and that body is the Ministry of Defence I can also point to some other opinion against the Bill—indeed, one of the Secretary of State’s predecessors, Sir Malcolm Rifkind. The Secretary of State has managed to unite Sir Malcolm Rifkind with the Scottish National party, and he was a leading nat-basher-in-chief back in his day. He has said that the Bill risks “undermining the UK’s position as a champion of the rule of law” That might be fashionable on Government Benches these days, but it is something that we in the Scottish National party will not stand for You could also quote the former Attorney General, Dominic Grieve. I hear the Government Front Bench often praying in aid the Attorney General for Northern Ireland. For a Bill that does not concern itself with Northern Ireland, you seem awfully keen on the Northern Irish Attorney General. As the shadow Secretary of State mentioned, we were told by the Secretary of State in a letter that he sent to all Members of the House that the Bill will be equivalent to what is brought forward in Northern Ireland. Well, good luck with that one We can also quote Field Marshal Lord Guthrie, although I understand he has taken some of what he said back. Again, he is hardly a lentil-munching leftie. He said: “There can be no exceptions to our laws, and no attempts to bend them. Those who break them should be judged in court. ” He also stated: “These proposals appear to have been dreamt up by those who have seen too little of the world to understand why the rules of war matter. If we start down the slippery slope of arguing that rules apply to others, but not to ourselves, it is we who will suffer in the end. ”	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons.u361	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-23	McDonald, Stewart Malcolm	Opposition to controversial defense bill	2020-09-23 00:00:00	2020-09-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons	I am grateful for my right hon. Friend’s comments. He is right to be sceptical: we are all sceptical and remain sceptical in government about this. However, it would be wrong not to recognise the significant step forward that this announcement represents In answer to my right hon. Friend’s point about hypothecation, I should say that it has been made clear that £100 million of the money announced today will be reserved for treatment over the four-year period. We will want to make sure that the requirements for treatment are met via this contribution and those that we expect the rest of the industry to make As I mentioned in the statement and as my right hon. Friend knows, commitments have already been made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to spend money on gambling, which is a recognised and real health problem. The money I have announced today is to supplement that. We must make sure that there is not duplication but rather that these contributions reinforce the money that is already committed.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons.u214	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Wright, Jeremy Paul	Grateful, sceptical, significant funding announced	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-10-commons	The hon. Lady will be more than aware of the work that we do to provide safe and legal routes for family reunion, and for vulnerable persons and children. She has heard me say that we are fully committed to supporting the most vulnerable children and the principle of family reunion. It is a fact that we are about to negotiate with the European Union. I set out the Government’s position clearly in communications and correspondence with the European Commission at the end of last year, and that is the route we will be pursuing.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-10-commons.u4	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-10	Patel, Priti Sushil	Commitment to vulnerable children's support	2020-02-10 00:00:00	2020-02-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	The date was set by the previous European Council, and it is not a unilateral decision for the UK Parliament whether that date is changed. Previously in the House the Father of the House said that what mattered was avoiding no deal. The Prime Minister has secured a deal that does that. What matters now is that we end the uncertainty for businesses and citizens, deliver on the deal the Prime Minister has negotiated—one agreed by the EU27 as well—and get Brexit done.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u203	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Barclay, Stephen Paul	End Brexit uncertainty deliver deal	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	I am sure many of us would like to congratulate the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) and Gina Miller on making sure that this remains a sovereign Parliament. The hon. Lady asked a question of the Attorney General which he has not answered. She asked him whether he could confirm that the Cabinet or members of the Cabinet—he is a member of that Cabinet —had asked to see his advice but were denied that opportunity. Can he confirm that his advice was requested by fellow members of the Cabinet but was denied?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u34	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Soubry, Anna Mary	Confirm denied Cabinet advice request	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	IGC	The Independent Group for Change	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons	Mr Speaker, I echo your words in relation to Tessa Jowell’s contribution in this place and the debate that we were privileged to be part of just a year ago. It is good to see the hon. Member for Croydon Central (Sarah Jones) in her place. We are in different places now, but the debate was a shared endeavour, and we were both privileged to be part of that special debate, when Tessa was here, and to champion the cause so well and so effectively With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on a new sustainable approach to delivering support for victims of domestic abuse and their children in accommodation-based services across England Domestic abuse is a devastating crime experienced by more than 2 million adults a year, with women twice as likely to be victims. That is completely unacceptable, and we have much more to do if we are to reach a point where no family lives with the threat of domestic abuse. Domestic abuse can take many forms and affects the young and old, male and female, but whoever the victim is, those fleeing abuse must have somewhere safe to go Just last year we announced £22 million to provide over 2,200 new beds in refuges and other safe accommodation, supporting more than 25,000 survivors with a safe space to rebuild their lives, but I know much more must be done to ensure a consistent approach across the country and to ensure that survivors have a safer future At the 2017 general election, the Prime Minister made a manifesto commitment to review funding for refuges. The violence against women and girls strategy for 2016 to 2020 set out our ambition to provide support for refuges and other accommodation-based services, helping local areas to ensure that no victim is turned away from the support they require at the time of need We also committed to reviewing the locally led approach to commissioning domestic abuse services. To meet that commitment, in January 2018 we began a full review of the funding and commissioning of domestic abuse services in England. We have worked closely with sector partners, drawing on their data, expertise and knowledge. This review complements wider Government work on tackling this devastating crime and supporting victims, including our new draft Domestic Abuse Bill Through the course of the review we have engaged with specialist domestic abuse service providers and their representative bodies, local authorities, police and crime commissioners and other organisations that support victims to understand fully both the challenges in commissioning and delivering these vital services and the positive features of the current system. We are grateful for their engagement and extensive input into our work We know there are dedicated professionals delivering support to victims and their children in accommodation-based services across England. This support helps victims move from danger and abuse to safety and independence, and their children to regain their childhoods. That includes the vital work of service managers and support staff, counsellors, outreach workers and play therapists, and I pay tribute to their work. However, we also know that we need to do more to ensure that all victims and their children can access support at the right time, underpinned by a sustainable approach to provision. We understand that victims and their children will live in a variety of different forms of safe accommodation and will need support to stay safe and rebuild their lives in all of them. That includes outreach support to remain safe in properties with enhanced security measures, in emergency or temporary accommodation, in dispersed accommodation and in refuges Although refuges play a critical role in supporting victims at high risk of serious harm, we have deliberately kept our definition of accommodation-based services wide to include the full range of safe accommodation in which victims and their children may require support. That will help local areas to meet the support needs of diverse groups of victims and their children, and those at lower and medium risk, to prevent their needs from escalating Having reviewed the current system and listened to the views of expert stakeholders, today I am proposing new local authority-led arrangements for delivering support to victims of domestic abuse and their children in accommodation-based services in England. The proposals will place a new statutory duty on upper-tier local authorities—county councils, metropolitan and unitary authorities, and the Greater London Authority—to convene a local partnership board for domestic abuse accommodation support services The local partnership boards should include representation from police and crime commissioners, health bodies, children’s services and housing providers, along with specialist domestic abuse service providers. The boards will be required to assess need for domestic abuse services; develop domestic abuse strategies; commission services to meet the support needs of victims and their children; and report progress to my Department In two-tier areas, lower-tier local authorities—city, district and borough councils and, in this instance, London boroughs—will have a significant role to play in contributing to needs assessments, strategy development, service commissioning and reporting on progress. Those areas will be subject to a statutory duty to co-operate with the local partnership board To support local authorities and local partnership boards to meet these new requirements, I am proposing that we should produce new statutory guidance, making our expectations clear. This new approach will be backed by funding from the Government to ensure that services are put on a sustainable, long-term footing; it will be determined through the forthcoming spending review and informed by the consultation I want to safeguard provision of support; to clarify expectations of governance and accountability; to ensure needs assessments are undertaken; and to enhance our understanding of service provision across England, through monitoring and reporting. I also want to ensure that the diverse needs of all victims and their children are met, including those with protected characteristics. This is part of a wider Government drive to tackle domestic abuse and end this pernicious crime for good. Our Domestic Abuse Bill, published in January, is the most comprehensive package ever to tackle domestic abuse. We have also brought in a new offence to capture coercive and controlling behaviour, and new domestic abuse protection orders will allow the police and courts to intervene earlier. It is our duty to ensure that victims and survivors can receive help by providing the support they need to transform their lives and move to safety and independence Through this consultation, I want to hear views on our proposals from victims and survivors, service providers, local authorities, housing providers and other public agencies, as well as professionals who support victims and children every day. I believe that this announcement today will provide much-needed help to ensure that more victims and their families better overcome their experiences, and move on to live full and independent lives. The consultation will run from today until 2 August. A copy of the consultation document will be placed in the House Library, and I commend this statement to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-commons.u194	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-13	Brokenshire, James Peter	New domestic abuse support approach	2019-05-13 00:00:00	2019-05-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons	I have been asked to reply, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is in Northern Ireland outlining the Government’s commitment to the people there and our plan to secure a Brexit deal that delivers on the result of the referendum I am sure that the whole House will want to join me in welcoming today’s announcement that the next meeting of NATO Heads of State and Government will take place in London in December 2019. This is fitting, as 70 years ago this year, the United Kingdom, led by those Atlanticist champions Clement Attlee and Ernie Bevin, was one of the alliance’s 12 founding members and London was home to the first NATO headquarters. We will continue to play a key role in NATO as it continues its mission of keeping nearly 1 billion people safe.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons.u87	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-06	Lidington, David Roy	NATO summit in London welcomed	2019-02-06 00:00:00	2019-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-commons	I want to expand on the point about the difference between the welfare state as originally devised by the 1945 Government, and what we have now. Does the hon. Gentleman accept that it is a moveable feast? Things have been added and taken away over the years. For example, dentistry was included at first, and it is not now. We added the free TV licences in 2000, and David Cameron added universal infant free school meals—heaven forbid that anyone would try to take them away now. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the welfare state has changed and evolved over the years, and that is a good thing?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-commons.u302	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-08	Hodgson, Sharon	Welfare state has evolved	2019-05-08 00:00:00	2019-05-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-21-commons	It is a matter for Mr Speaker to take points of order. That is part of the wide discretion that he has under other parts of the motion. The key thing—this is what came out of our discussions—is that we cannot interrupt proceedings where Members are up on screens virtually. It would be impossible to interrupt them with a point of order as they are speaking. There will be a way of working on that. It may well happen, but it is entirely at Mr Speaker’s discretion. Hopefully he will deal with injustices that may occur in the Chamber I think you suggested, Mr Speaker, that there might be a dress code for the House. Certainly there is the issue of what goes on behind Members in terms of animals, children, wallpaper and all that, as we have seen. Clearly the dress code will apply only to the Member’s top half—unless, of course, it is the Leader of the House. I know that he sometimes likes to be horizontal, so for him the dress code will in fact apply to the top half and the bottom half I thank everyone for getting us to this position. Subject to certain undertakings, Her Majesty’s Opposition support the motion.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-21-commons.u22	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-04-21	Vaz, Valerie Carol Marian	Mr Speaker's discretion on order	2020-04-21 00:00:00	2020-04-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-lords	My Lords, it is good to take part in this debate secured by my noble friend Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, whose commitment to and leadership in the NHS is known to us all. I am also delighted to follow the inspirational maiden speech of my noble friend Lady Wilcox, who I think has cheered us all up Speeches about the NHS are inevitably a cross between a love letter and a post-it note. The love letter bit is revisiting everything in one’s life that makes one grateful to the NHS, despite all its faults. For me, it is the safe birth of my three beautiful children, two of them twins, born in the brand new John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford in the 1970s, the restoration to rude health of my husband from leukaemia 10 years ago and my mother’s care in her final years of dementia We all have our personal love letter to the NHS, but we also have the post-it note reminder: never to be complacent about this amazing national service; always to hold the Government to account; and to ask the awkward questions, as my noble friend has asked in his debate today, on performance, safe staffing, budgets and future prospects This year, 2020, is Florence Nightingale’s bicentenary and has been designated the Year of the Nurse and Midwife by the World Health Organization. In this year, it is right that, in response to the NHS long-term plan, we highlight, as has the Health Foundation, the real difficulty of growing pressure on our services and the widespread pressure of staff shortages In our local campaign in Banbury, Oxfordshire, which has been going on for years now, to keep the Horton hospital general and functioning across many departments, time and again the question of not being able to recruit staff—from the UK, Europe or the Commonwealth—has been cited for closing services. How will workplace shortages in both the NHS and the social care system be handled post Brexit under the Government’s new immigration strategy When it comes to staff pay, the social care sector in this country, in particular, as noble Lords have said, has nothing to be proud of. We cannot continue to run a care system on the cheap with an ageing population, the rising incidence of dementia and the prospect of AI just around the corner—benign or otherwise. The excellent House of Lords Library briefing for this debate reminds us of the facts when it comes to the targets spoken of by my noble friend. NHS England’s performance against the four-hour A&E waiting time target in November 2019 was the worst since the figures started being collected in 2010. The 62-day maximum waiting time target between an urgent GP referral and the first cancer treatment was last met, astonishingly, in 2013-14. Also in November 2019, NHS England was below its operational standards for elective referrals, cancer referrals and treatment waiting times. Had those figures been owned by a Labour Government over the past 10 years, the media would have hounded us out of office. All those targets are now under review, and in that review, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has called on NHS England not to reduce current standards to make them easier to meet. That is a forlorn hope, I fear, but again we call for it today I was proud to be a member of a Labour Government who invested record sums in our NHS and the social care system. However, we did not grasp the issue of long-term social care funding and it is now for the Government to step up and turn the Prime Minister’s rhetoric into the reality of a properly funded NHS and social care system for the future, free from the threat of a trade deal with the United States and free at the point of use well into this century.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-lords.u70	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-06	Crawley, Christine Mary	NHS staffing and funding challenges	2020-02-06 00:00:00	2020-02-06 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-commons	With permission, Mr Speaker, I shall make a statement about the collapse of Flybe In the early hours of this morning, Flybe ceased trading. This was a commercial decision by the company and Flybe has filed for insolvency. UK airports handled 9.5 million Flybe passengers in 2008, 80% of whom were travelling within the UK. An estimated 15,000 passengers were due to fly today, so our immediate priority is to support passengers travelling home and employees who have lost their jobs Flybe has had a challenging year in terms of its financial performance, with a decline in bookings and increased competition. Levelling up connectivity across our regions and nations is a top priority for this Government. We are driving forward HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail, we have announced a £5 billion funding package for bus and cycle links, and we are investing £6.6 billion to improve the condition of local highway networks between 2015 and 2021. We are undertaking a review of regional connectivity to ensure that the UK has the domestic transport connections on which local communities can rely, including regional airports. The Treasury is also reviewing air passenger duty to ensure that regional connectivity is supported while meeting the UK’s climate change commitment to meet net zero by 2050 These measures featured in conversations with Flybe back in January and, in turn, it agreed to continue operating. Since then, we have been working tirelessly to explore multiple options with Flybe shareholders to find a solution. Flybe outlined that problems with its business had been compounded by the outbreak of coronavirus, which, in the past few days, has had a significant impact on demand. The directors have therefore decided that it was not viable to keep Flybe operating. Unfortunately, in a competitive market, companies do fail, and it is not the role of Government to prop them up Given the time of year, the nature of Flybe’s business and fleet, and the routes that it flies, sufficient alternative transport arrangements should be available, either with other airlines or by road and rail The number of passengers abroad is small and it is further reduced as a result of coronavirus. For those passengers who are abroad, there is sufficient capacity on commercial airlines to return to the UK. The Civil Aviation Authority and the Secretary of State are encouraging these airlines to offer rescue fares, and that is already happening. I thank those airlines, including easyJet, which has today announced that it will offer Flybe passengers a dedicated rescue fare until the end of May. We are working with bus and rail operators to support Flybe passengers to get to their destinations, and I am extremely grateful that the Rail Delivery Group has this morning confirmed that all operators are offering free travel to Flybe staff and passengers for a week I ask passengers due to fly with Flybe in the next few days not to turn up at the airport. Instead, they should look at the website set up by the Civil Aviation Authority, and talk to their travel agents, travel insurance providers and credit card companies. For those who do arrive at UK airports today, we are making Government representatives available to offer support and provide information to affected passengers I express my sincere sympathy to those who have lost their jobs as a result of this failure, including crew, engineers, technicians, staff at Flybe headquarters in Exeter and others. We understand that this is a worrying time for workers and their families. The Department for Work and Pensions stands ready to support anyone affected by the closure with its rapid response service offer, which will be available to all those affected through local Jobcentre Plus outlets. Additionally, in the event of any redundancies, there are special arrangements for employees who are owed redundancy payments and other payments by their insolvent employer. The redundancy payments service in the Insolvency Service can pay certain amounts owed to former employees from the national insurance fund. I will work with my ministerial colleagues to ensure that any redundancy payments are paid to affected employees as soon as possible We recognise the impact that this situation will have on UK airports, particularly those which have large-scale Flybe operations. The Government stand ready to support the sector, and I have full confidence that it will respond as effectively as it always has. We are urgently working with the industry to identify opportunities to fill routes, and I have spoken to the airlines today to emphasise this. Aviation is facing challenges globally due to the impact of coronavirus. The Government are well prepared for this, and as the wider economic picture becomes clearer, the Chancellor has said that he stands ready to announce further support where needed. I will be chairing a roundtable with members of the aviation industry next week to discuss issues presented by coronavirus I thank passengers for their patience and appreciate the work undertaken by everyone who has again stepped up to ensure that passengers and local communities are supported. We will continue to work across Government to ensure that passengers and staff are able to access the information and services they require at this sad and challenging time.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-commons.u212	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-05	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Flybe collapses; government support response	2020-03-05 00:00:00	2020-03-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-13-commons	I agree. It is outrageous that the Government are actively penalising people for volunteering when we need to be encouraging volunteering. In particular, it helps people who are looking for work to develop the skills that they need to gain employment. I hope the Minister will take that away and look at it People are connecting in neighbourhoods and on social media to collaborate and bring about the change that we desperately need in this country. The digital revolution has opened up data, information and connectivity in the most extraordinary ways. It offers the potential to renew our democracy, making it more open, responsive and participative. This is the new civil society. It is a force for change of the most incredible potential, if only we had a Government with the vision and ambition to support it, like the very best Labour councils already do Barking and Dagenham’s Every One Every Day initiative has launched spaces and projects across the borough that bring people together in their neighbourhoods to solve the problems they face. It has dramatically increased participation, with projects as diverse as shared cooking, community composting, play streets and even a listening barber. It is a great example of asset-based community development—a model that is proving its power in communities across the country In my borough of Croydon, the Parchmore medical centre in Thornton Heath has spawned a network of more than 100 community-led projects that keep people healthier, and it has dramatically reduced the number of people who need to see a GP. There are sessions on healthy cooking for young families, mobility classes for older people and coffee mornings in the local pub, before it opens for customers, for people isolated in their homes. All of it is free, and all of it is run in and by the community. It has had an extraordinary impact on people’s wellbeing simply by getting neighbours to know each other better and to speak to each other Plymouth has set up the country’s biggest network of community energy co-ops to generate energy sustainably and plough the profits back into the local community. Stevenage is pioneering community budgeting, involving local community groups. Preston is leading on community wealth building by focusing council procurement on community organisations. In Lambeth, the council has set up, with the community, Black Thrive, a new social enterprise that gives the black community greater oversight of the mental health services that the community uses. In all these cases, existing or new community groups, charities and social enterprises have shown they have the power to transform lives. They open up decision making to the creativity and innovation that lies untapped in too many of our communities.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-13-commons.u360	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-13	Reed, Steven Mark Ward	Support community-led initiatives government	2019-02-13 00:00:00	2019-02-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-lords	The noble Lord is right. Different parties have been involved in this. I want to make it clear that the UK Government have played a strong role in taking this forward, and I reiterate that the Northern Ireland Executive made certain pledges back in 2014. I also reiterate that it is now up to the Northern Ireland Executive to take this matter forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-lords.u109	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-03	Younger, James	Northern Ireland Executive responsibility	2020-06-03 00:00:00	2020-06-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords	My Lords, I begin by reminding the House of my interest as a deputy chairman of the Local Government Association No local authority leader will ever forget the first death from a knife attack on their patch, while they were in charge. Early in my leadership of Westminster City Council, I was deeply affected by the murder of a 16 year-old boy who was hacked to death with machetes by a gang of youths on a busy Pimlico street at 4 o’clock in the afternoon. This horrific crime was part of a dispute relating to drug-dealing territories; the police swiftly found the perpetrators and brought them to justice along with those who attempted to hide them. This was about seven years ago; as we all know in this Chamber, knife crime, along with serious violence involving guns and corrosive substances, has continued to rise and it is our young people, often from deprived areas, who are in the front line. For this reason, I welcome the Bill and its approach to tackling violence on our streets The Offensive Weapons Bill will give police greater powers to tackle the growing problems we face but, more importantly, it is part of the Government’s Serious Violence Strategy launched in April last year. This strategy advocates a partnership approach between the police, local government, charities and local people; in my experience, it sets out the collaborative working needed not only to deter potential offenders, through swift and strong justice, but to divert those at risk of becoming victims or perpetrators from becoming part of the culture—often linked to gangs—that is so prevalent in some of our most deprived areas In the interests of time, and basing my words on my own experience, I will speak about the work that London Councils has undertaken to combat this growing problem in our capital and to illustrate how the Serious Violence Strategy can work in practice. All 32 boroughs plus the City of London work collaboratively across London; they do so not only as boroughs, but by bringing in many other relevant providers in sectors such as health, schools, the voluntary sector, the GLA and local residents, as well as, of course, co-ordinating with the police. Within London boroughs many, such as Westminster, take a cross-departmental approach, bringing in expertise from housing, social services, planning, culture and children’s services London is a very diverse city; it is therefore important that each borough develops approaches that suit its local needs and can be co-ordinated across boroughs. Boroughs have developed different approaches to best fit their circumstances, and this allows cross-borough experimentation and learning. London Councils has established a repository of practice on serious youth violence, which has useful links to data sources and other resources and makes available to boroughs the knife crime action plans of community safety partnerships. These set out the core elements that would appear effective in a local knife crime plan so that boroughs developing plans do not have to reinvent approaches In order to facilitate this collaborative approach, some boroughs have established integrated gangs or anti-violence units. Some have collocated staff from different departments and other bodies while others use virtual collocation; both strategies seem to be working well. Westminster has one of the highest volumes of weapon-enabled crime in London, as a result of the concentration seen predominantly in the West End area and linked to the night-time economy. The council has used the multiagency approach to tackling this issue to great effect. It begins with a grass-roots approach, which challenges the belief that carrying a knife keeps you safe and that selling drugs has no victims. It is an online platform that uses a series of films to portray the full impact of drug dealing and carrying knives. The films are made by young people from Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea, and Hammersmith and Fulham Westminster’s integrated gangs unit is a multiagency team launched in 2011 in response to the rising rates of gang violence and aims to intervene and divert young people away from gangs and criminality. In 2018 Westminster established a task group to look at the changing nature of violence and weapons use and ways that council departments and other agencies can further work together to greater effect. The youth offending team not only works with those who have committed a crime but delivers a range of preventive interventions targeted at young people and parents. Community weapons sweeps aid the removal of offensive weapons from our streets, while anonymous reporting gives the council and local police valuable intelligence to help the fight against violence. The Westminster trading standards team is also working with local businesses to create a partnership to stop the sale of corrosive substances to young people Several boroughs have taken a public health approach, focusing on harm reduction, primary prevention and early years. This approach is focused on analysing the underlying causes of serious youth violence and tackling those issues before they develop into a serious problem. Similarly, other boroughs such as Lewisham use a trauma-informed health approach, the key principles of which are to develop a local understanding of the adverse impact of childhood experiences on the prevalence of violent crime. They endeavour to ensure that schools are a place of safety for young and vulnerable people and offer a space to address adverse childhood experience early, aiming to develop resilience and emotional intelligence in children so that they understand how to live a safe and healthy life One particularly effective technique used by many schools and youth groups is talks by ex-gang members about the dangers of the lifestyle that they have left behind them. The speakers are usually young men who the children can relate to, who look cool and could be seen as role models. But it is not just about trying to put young people off involvement; alternative activities need to be available as well, which is where youth clubs and programmes have such an important role to play. Boxing clubs, football clubs and centres that offer facilities with teachers for young people to compose or play music, or for other creative activities, are vital for ensuring that young people are engaged in positive activities in a social environment instead of on the streets with little to do, where they are easy prey for those wishing to pull them into the gang lifestyle There is still much to learn and much to do to reverse the frightening trend of increasing serious youth violence and its use of offensive weapons. The Bill will help the police to target and punish those who are already intent on inflicting or threatening injury and those who assist them, and I support it. It is clear, however, that to really have an impact, prevention needs to be at the heart of any approach. Diverting those who are at risk of being sucked into gangs or feel vulnerable if they are not armed must be at the centre of what we do, and I sincerely hope that the Government’s serious violence strategy is backed up with sufficient resources, not just for the police but for those other bodies on the front line of dealing with this problem.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords.u92	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Roe, Philipa	Combating youth violence and gangs	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-commons	The right hon. Lady makes a very powerful case. As I have said a number of times at this Dispatch Box in answer to several hon. and right hon. Members, we believe that it is terribly unfair that the small producer will be caught in the crossfire of a dispute in which they had no part and no part in making. I am very happy to meet her to talk particularly about her local employer and hear its local arguments, and she must feel under absolutely no obligation to come to that meeting with any whisky from her local producer.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-commons.u369	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-07	Burns, Conor	Unfair dispute impact on producers	2019-10-07 00:00:00	2019-10-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for paying tribute to consular staff and FCO teams, and the work that they are doing, and for the general points that she has made. I can reassure her that embassies are being kept open wherever possible in order to give British nationals who find themselves stranded or in a vulnerable position the support that they need, even if they cannot physically access the embassy or the high commission building. I can go further than that and tell her that we have spent the last fortnight reprioritising the work of the Foreign Office and our missions, so that the lion’s share—all but the most essential alternative business—is focused on the consular effort. We are limiting the drawdowns, in the way in which some hon. Members have suggested, to those that are required because of vulnerability or safety, and reprioritising them to meet the challenge of providing the consular services that we need.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons.u220	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Prioritizing consular support for Brits	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-lords	There is a specific issue about transparency of online campaign messaging, which was a major issue in May and was a big issue in the referendum and the subsequent general election. The Cabinet Office consulted about it many months ago. Evidence was taken from the Information Commissioner’s Office; the Electoral Commission also looked into it. I would be grateful if the Minister could take back to the Cabinet Office the concern from all over your Lordships’ House that there seems to be very little action taking place on this. It remains a very sensitive issue, not least because of the important report from the DCMS Select Committee.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-lords.u146	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-23	Tyler, Paul	Transparency of online campaign messaging	2019-10-23 00:00:00	2019-10-23 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords	The public’s money is what the Government spend. Everything that the Government do is with taxpayers’ money, so I do not really understand the noble Baroness’s point. I should mention, as the noble Lord mentioned the Liberal Democrats, that the Liberal Democrat 2015 manifesto committed to remove the concession for higher-rate taxed pensioners. We have to be careful about what we said when. As for the point about social welfare, the agreement made in 2015 was not about tax policy; it was simply about whether the BBC should have the responsibility for the concession, and that is what it was given.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords.u59	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-11	Ashton, Thomas	Government spending taxpayer money	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons	At this very moment, Derriford Hospital in Plymouth is on OPEL 4 alert—the new name for black alert. The real shame is that that is now so commonplace that it no longer always makes the news. Will the Secretary of State, who I know visited the hospital recently, explain whether the new NHS plan will address the structural inequalities in funding for the regions, especially the far south-west? Those inequalities often contribute to the underfunding of services, which is why our hospital is on OPEL 4.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons.u447	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Pollard, Luke	Hospital funding inequalities	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight the importance of mental health, and healthcare more broadly, for offenders and particularly young people. The levels of self-harm are deeply concerning, and we need to do more to drive them down. More broadly, we are seeking to have better liaison and diversion services, which divert those who genuinely have a mental health need and, where that can be better treated in the community, to have that option. We are also working on our health and justice plan, which is about improving the mental health and physical healthcare pathways for all those who enter custody.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-24-commons.u249	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-24	Argar, Edward John Comport	Addressing offender mental health services	2019-07-24 00:00:00	2019-07-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons	I thank the Minister for advance sight of the statement. We welcome it and are pleased that a decision has been reached on the Northern Ireland protocol. The Good Friday agreement is a source of immense pride on this side of the House, given the role that Tony Blair’s Labour Government played in building on the work of Sir John Major in achieving it. Neither of those Governments would play games with the peace process, and nor would a Government led by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer). Game playing, with threats to break international law, has consequences, and it is also a dangerous distraction Northern Ireland’s Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs says that the border infrastructure simply will not be ready in time. Manufacturing NI says that just 9% of businesses in Northern Ireland are ready for the end of the transition period. The systems needed to make trade flow, such as the trader support service, reportedly will not even be going live until 21 December—eight working days before the end of the transition period. This really does give new meaning to “the night before Christmas”. Last December, the Prime Minister said: “We’re a UK government, why would we put checks on goods going from NI to GB or GB to NI? It doesn't make sense. ” With that in mind, will the Minister explain why today’s documents confirm that on trade from GB to NI there will indeed be a range of checks? The trusted trader scheme will be removed after three and a half years and reviewed then, with further uncertainty at that point The exemption on agrifood checks is available for only three months, so will the Minister tell us what guarantees there are on prices and availability of fresh food supplies in Northern Ireland after 1 April? Will custom checks be required just three months into 2021? All that raises the question: did the Prime Minister actually know what he had signed up to last year, and then give false assurances to the House, or did he simply not care? This is a disgraceful way to treat businesses in good times, never mind in the middle of a pandemic On the trade deal needed for Northern Ireland, and for Great Britain too, we are told that the level playing field remains an outstanding area of disagreement, yet the Prime Minister’s political declaration, which he signed with the EU, spoke of a future relationship with “open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field. ” Some Conservative MPs are agitated by the idea of a floor on workers’ rights. Indeed, no fewer than three Cabinet Ministers jointly wrote a book that said that British workers are “among the worst idlers in the world. ” We on this side of the House do not agree with that statement. Neither do the people of our country, who want more security at work, not less. There are some siren voices among those on the Government Benches, who appear to view any agreement with the EU as a betrayal. The Minister should know that the true betrayal would be job losses, border chaos and price rises in our shops The Minister referred to cars from Nissan and lamb exports from Wales, and that they will be tariff-free in Northern Ireland, but as he knows, they need to be tariff-free with the EU too. We on this side of the House want the negotiations to succeed. We want the Government to keep their promises and come back with the oven-ready deal that we were promised at the general election less than a year ago. Sometimes it feels as though we on this side of the House want the Government to succeed and bring back this deal more than those on the Government’s own Back Benches do Deal or no deal, there are preparations that still need to be made for Northern Ireland, and for Great Britain too. I want to ask again about customs agents, because just minutes ago, the Prime Minister did not seem to have any answers on how many there are. Earlier in the year, the Minister agreed with industry estimates of 50,000 customs agents needed. Since then, he has told the BBC that the number had increased fourfold, but he omitted to tell us what the figure was. Let us give him another chance: how many customs agents are in place and are we ready for the end of the transition period It is not just me asking these questions. Richard Burnett, chief executive of the Road Haulage Association, says: “The big issue that we face is that there are insufficient customs agents” and that without them and the correct paperwork, “we are likely to see vehicles being turned around… That is going to create significant chaos and significant queues. ” On lorry parks, will the Minister tell us how many inland border facilities are ready and will they ensure the free flow of lorries and vehicles from 1 January? Can he guarantee the House that there will be no disruption to medical or food supplies from 1 January Ours is a great country, and Labour wants to see a good life for all our people, but, as great as our country is, it cannot afford to be afflicted by Government incompetence. Every price rise, every traffic jam, every lost contract and every redundancy caused by this Government’s mistakes and poor planning holds our great country back. Next year must be a year of rebuilding and recovering from covid-19, not dealing with the fallout of reckless decision making, tariffs or incompetence. So this is decision time for this Government, and it is time to get the deal.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons.u132	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-09	Reeves, Rachel Jane	Critique of Government's Brexit preparation	2020-12-09 00:00:00	2020-12-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-lords	I am pleased to speak in support of Amendment 48 from my noble friend Lady Fookes. As ever, she makes a point that is pertinent and clear, and that is absolutely required at this stage. In doing so, I also congratulate my noble friend Lord Blencathra and the members of the Delegated Powers Committee on all their work in this area. As other noble Lords have said, the Government are in listening mode on this. That can be only a good thing, and it is largely down to the persuasive power of my noble friend.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-lords.u167	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-23	Holmes, Christopher	Supporting Amendment 48 praise	2020-06-23 00:00:00	2020-06-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON;NA	Conservative;Non-affiliated	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for her question. She will also know that almost three times as many intermediate inputs used by businesses in Wales come from the rest of the UK than from the rest of the world put together. That is why it is important that we continue with a seamless internal market, which is good news for her constituents. I would just say to her that I am not prone to hysteria.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-commons.u292	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-16	Sharma, Alok Kumar	Support for seamless internal market	2020-07-16 00:00:00	2020-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-lords	The noble Lord is right to refer to this. I cannot give him an exact inventory of the stockpile. All I can share with the House is that, partly because of our no-deal preparations, the warehouses are bursting with medicines and medical equipment. This is an inadvertent but not unwelcome aspect of the situation we are in.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-03-lords.u103	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-03	Bethell, James	Stockpile details; warehouses full	2020-03-03 00:00:00	2020-03-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-commons	Absolutely. It is not either/or; it is about working together. High Speed North is a rebranding and a new way of organising this—we should firmly hammer that point home—and it is about making this project one that is led in the northern regions by the northern regions, for the northern regions. I welcome that change in the governance.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-commons.u507	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-02	Mullan, Kieran John	High Speed North collaboration	2020-03-02 00:00:00	2020-03-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-commons	The lower the rate of infection and the lower the admissions, the more chance there is to get the virus under control. That is why you have to go early. If you want to safeguard the economy, go early. How on earth has it helped the British economy to delay and to go into a lockdown for four weeks when, on 21 September, SAGE was saying it could be two to three weeks? How on earth has it helped the British economy to miss the chance to do lockdown over half-term All Members will have seen the data about schools. We all want schools to stay open. How on earth did it make sense to miss half-term? Most schools would happily have said, “We’ll get up early—the Thursday before half-term—and we’ll use Monday and Tuesday as inset days,” and we could probably have got the best part of two weeks of schools being closed naturally, because of half-term, and have the lockdown over then. I do not think there can be anybody in this House who does not think that would have been a better period for a circuit break, lockdown—call it what you like It has not helped the economy to waste three weeks. If, at the end of those three weeks, the Prime Minister could say, “Well, there we are—the tiered system is now working, and I’m going to stick with it,” that would be one thing, but the Prime Minister is now saying, “I am going to do the lockdown,” which is failure. That is failure The next four weeks cannot be wasted—cannot be wasted. We have got to fix test, trace and isolate. The last figures show that, in just one week, 113,000 contacts were missed by the system. Four in 10 people who should be contacted are not being contacted under the system. If you are not contacted, you cannot isolate. It is not just a number; that is 113,000 people walking round our communities when they should have been self-isolating. Hands up if you think that has helped to control the virus We have been on about the track, trace and isolate system for months. The promises come by the wheelbarrow, the delivery never. Only 20% of people who should be isolating are doing it. Something is going wrong. Just continually pushing away challenge and pretending the problem does not exist is a huge part of the problem. Those figures have got to turn around, and they have got to turn around in the next four weeks. If we get to 2 December and those problems are still in the system, we will be going round this circuit for many months to come. If this is not fixed in the next four weeks, there are massive problems The Government have also got to stop sending constant mixed messages: “Go back to work, even if you can work from home,” or “Civil servants, get to work,” only a week later to say, “Stay at home. ” The constant changing of the economic plans is creating even more uncertainty. There have been huge mistakes made in recent weeks during this pandemic. We have been told so many times by the Prime Minister, often on a Wednesday afternoon, that there is a plan to prevent a second wave—it is working. Well, there was not, and it did not Now, less than four months after the Prime Minister told us that this would all be over by Christmas, we are being asked to approve emergency regulations to shut the country down. That is a terrible thing for the country to go through, but there is not any excuse for inaction or for allowing the virus to get further out of control, so Labour will act in the national interest, and we will vote for these restrictions—these regulations—tonight.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-commons.u168	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-04	Starmer, Keir	Government's lockdown response criticized	2020-11-04 00:00:00	2020-11-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons	I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) for her thoughtful comment. I emphasise and echo the work that she has done, but acknowledge her apology as well. She is absolutely right about the role of the race disparity audit. There is much that we can all take from this review. We should all as individuals be more conscious and aware not just of how we engage people, but of how we reach an understanding of communities and cultures, to help us all and to inform decision making and policies across Government in the future.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons.u235	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-19	Patel, Priti Sushil	Promoting understanding and awareness	2020-03-19 00:00:00	2020-03-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-29-commons	I will not, because it would mean that my Back-Bench colleagues will not get a chance to speak Today is 29 March—the day we should have left the European Union—so it is a good day to look at the report cards for the Government and the leave campaign on where we should have been by today. Where is the £350 million Brexit bonanza for our NHS? It is not there. Where is the easiest trade deal in history? Not only is it not the easiest in history, but the Government have had to take it out of this particular debate to get their deal through. Where is taking back control? Indeed, we are ceding control. Where is the promise of no border on the island of Ireland? The solution cannot be found by the Government because of the red lines they set themselves. Where are the 40 bilateral trade deals that we should have just rolled over by midnight tonight? Where is the cap and the reduction in net migration? It cannot be met. Where is more money going into our public services, when £4.2 billion is being spent on no deal? Those are not just broken promises; they also broke the law. There are no sunny uplands in this process. Today we should all say loud and clear that we are slaying the unicorns once and for all This is not meaningful vote 3, it is meaningful vote 2 and a half. The Government are not complying with their own legislation, and they know it. My right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) was absolutely right: there is nothing wrong with somebody selling their house, but they have to know where they will go next. The Government are asking us to sell the house without knowing where we go next. It is not only that we do not know where we will go next with the political declaration, but that we do not even know who will do that negotiation. This is a blind Brexit with a blind Prime Minister and a blind Government. My hon. Friend the hon. Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) made a wonderful speech from the Front Bench, and he was absolutely correct: the entire debate on our future relationship with the European Union will be conducted after a Conservative leadership election that could provide a Prime Minister who will rip up the political declaration and take us into territory that we do not want to be taken into What happens if the motion passes today but the political declaration—or, indeed, the implementation Bill—does not pass? My right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central was absolutely correct that, come 22 May, we will again end up in the situation in which it is the Prime Minister’s deal or no deal, with no opportunity to extend the process In this process, the Prime Minister is the shopkeeper in the “Monty Python” sketch involving the dead Norwegian parrot, and Parliament is Mr Praline. It is quite clear that her deal is no more. It has ceased to exist. It is bereft of life. It rests in peace. It is a deal that has been nailed to its perch. It is an ex-parrot; it is an ex-deal. Interestingly, at the end of that sketch, the shopkeeper says, “this is getting silly”, and the sketch gives up. Prime Minister and Government: this is getting silly. Give up and listen to the House We might end up having to revoke article 50 come 22 May if we pass this motion but have no opportunity to do anything else. I suggest that the Government now listen to the indicative vote process that happened on Wednesday, act with dignity and respect this House as that process continues next week. They should also listen to what the public are saying. It is completely unfair that the Prime Minister can keep flogging the dead horse of her deal as many times as she likes in this House yet the public got one chance three years ago, with all the sunny uplands and broken promises they were given in 2016. Let us give the British people a confirmatory vote and let them back into the process to break the impasse in Parliament. If they still wish to leave the European Union, and if the Prime Minister is so confident about her deal, she will go to them and get them to back it. If they do not, we can maintain the best deal we have at the moment, which is to be a fully-fledged member of the European Union.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-29-commons.u191	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-29	Murray, Ian	Government's Brexit failures and criticisms	2019-03-29 00:00:00	2019-03-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons	My right hon. Friend is being very gracious and I very much appreciate that. Many of us in this place—I would like to think the majority of us—would prefer a good trade deal to WTO. That is not inconsistent, but I think what my right hon. Friend misses is that on a bad deal versus WTO we have got to get the balance right, because the EU has had such a bad track record on negotiating trade deals. We trade with the rest of the world on WTO terms very profitably and very successfully, even though many of us would prefer a good trade deal.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons.u537	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-08	Baron, John Charles	Prefer good trade deal	2019-01-08 00:00:00	2019-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons	I beg to move, That this House expresses its serious concern at the 2019 Loan Charge which applies from 5 April 2019; expresses deep concern and regret about the effect of the mental and emotional impact on people facing the Loan Charge; is further concerned about suicides of people facing the Loan Charge and the identified suicide risk, which was reported to HMRC; believes that the Loan Charge is fundamentally unfair and undermines the principle of the rule of law by overriding statutory taxpayer protections; expresses disappointment at the lack of notice served by HMRC and the delays in communication with those now facing the Loan Charge, which has further increased anxiety of individuals and families; is concerned about the nature and accuracy of the information circulated by HMRC with regard to the Loan Charge; further regrets the inadequate impact assessment originally conducted; understands that many individuals have received miscalculated settlement information; calls for an immediate suspension of the Loan Charge for a period of six months and for all related settlements to be put on hold; and further calls for an independent inquiry into the Loan Charge to be conducted by a party that is not connected with either the Government or HMRC I want to thank the Backbench Business Committee for agreeing to bring forward this important debate. I also want to thank the members of the all-party parliamentary loan charge group for all their work and the many colleagues who have added their names to the motion before us today. The urgency of today’s debate cannot be understated. As of tomorrow, tens of thousands of people and their families will face the huge cost, both physical and emotional, of the loan charge. HMRC has yet to show any regard to the enormous pain that this legislation has already inflicted on thousands of people across the country I represent Aberdeen South, which is Europe’s energy hub and the very heart of the UK’s oil and gas industry, and my surgeries have been inundated with people who are concerned about the damage that the loan charge will have on their financial security. Many of my constituents working in the oil and gas industry were actively encouraged by their companies and professional advisers to enter into these schemes, without a single peep from HMRC, and some did so for many years. The oil and gas industry is just one of many that has long relied on the hard work of contractors as a crucial element of its supply chains. These contractors provide a hugely valuable workforce, and concerns over the loan charge have driven away many of those who have worked in the industry and will deter people from contracting in the future. HMRC should be in no doubt this will be bad for business, bad for public finances and bad for the country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Thomson, Ross	Loan Charge unjust and harmful	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons	There is not a specific 1:8 requirement for flooding schemes—it is just that, overall, that is the average return on flood schemes. When we assess where we are going to direct capital, it is predominantly based on the flood risk of a given area and the number of homes that a particular scheme will protect.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons.u315	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-24	Eustice, Charles George	Flood schemes prioritize risk and homes	2020-02-24 00:00:00	2020-02-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons	My constituent on this flight came to the UK in 1997 aged 26. He married a British citizen in 2004 and has two children aged 21 and 18. He was in prison for two years, and had he not been he would have been able to complete the process of indefinite leave to remain. His life was under threat when he was in Jamaica. It will be under threat if he is returned there. He is on suicide watch at the moment and has an active asylum claim. He was picked up last week and due to be deported this week. Will the Minister at least agree that this is not a proportionate reaction and that this flight should be delayed at least to give the opportunity for proper legal advice to be taken?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons.u183	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-30	Slaughter, Andrew Francis	Deportation unjust, request delay	2020-11-30 00:00:00	2020-11-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker The future fund will provide venture capital-backed businesses with vital support, but of course it excludes investments made through the enterprise investment scheme and the seed enterprise investment scheme. It is certainly the case that there is significant public subsidy within those two schemes. However, businesses supported by them still face the challenges of the virus and, where successful, still go on to generate significant numbers of jobs. Will my right hon. Friend therefore take a second look at the qualification requirements for the future fund to see whether EIS and SEIS might be accommodated in some way?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons.u22	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-18	Stride, Melvyn John	Review future fund qualifications	2020-05-18 00:00:00	2020-05-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-commons	My right hon. Friend makes a sound point. A lot of the issue is that we have been in lockdown and there has been an enormous increase in demand for water because people have been at home, filling their paddling pools and watering their gardens and vegetable patches, as I have. That increased use of water has put on immediate pressure. It is not a drought situation, but he is right: we need to deal with our overall water supply, and that is absolutely on this Government’s agenda A decision as to whether the infrastructure projects I have referred to could come within the scope of the 2013 regulations will be made on a case-by-case basis at the appropriate time when the schemes are brought forward. The Government are committed to improving water supply resilience, as set out in our strategic policy statement to Ofwat and our 25-year environment plan. That ambition is made more challenging because of the growing population, increased water demand from agriculture and industry and, of course, climate change We also want to ensure that there is sufficient water left for the natural environment. Without any action, many areas of England will face water shortages by 2050. The starting point for action is to reduce water use by reducing leakage from the water distribution networks and reducing our personal consumption. However, even if leaks and personal consumption are reduced, we will continue to need new water resource infrastructure. In our “Water conservation report”, published in December 2018, we set out our progress on promoting water conservation from 2015 onwards.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-commons.u244	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-10	Clark (Pow), Rebecca Faye	Increase water demand; improve supply	2020-06-10 00:00:00	2020-06-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-commons	As ever, it is a huge pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas). We have heard a lot about polls today. I will give the House a couple. We all know the figures of 52% and 48%, and it is intrinsic and behoves the House to respect the referendum result, but another figure is 34%, which is the current polling for the Labour party. That is quite incredible at this time. The reasons for that figure were encapsulated by the hon. Member for Barrow and Furness (John Woodcock), who said that the shadow Chancellor and the Leader of the House are simply unfit for high office. As people get closer to the potential of a buy-in decision, they will see that very starkly indeed. The other reason for the 34% polling is the six tests—the magic unicorn tests—which are designed to fail. The public are not foolish and they are not going to be hoodwinked. They know intrinsically that the six tests are sophistry of the most politically contemptible sort. At some point—later today, or tomorrow—the grown-ups will have to have a conversation about what the Opposition actually want.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-16-commons.u463	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-16	Knight, Julian Carlton	Labour polling and leadership critique	2019-01-16 00:00:00	2019-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons	The Foreign and Commonwealth Office does an amazing job with about 20,000 foreign national consular cases every year—to put that into context, that is about 30 per Member of Parliament per year. Notwithstanding the complexity of this case and of dealing with Iran, this does highlight some fundamental issues around how we treat dual nationals. Is it not time to review the policy on dual nationals and the advice we give them when they are travelling to their other country?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons.u327	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Duddridge, James Philip	Review dual nationals policy	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons	I seek to clarify my earlier question, which did not seem to get through. Is the Department working on a better regime for fishing in general, and for fish health in particular, for once we have left? This is a great opportunity, and fishing is an area that has been very badly damaged by EU membership.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-20	Redwood, John Alan	Fishing industry post-EU improvements	2019-02-20 00:00:00	2019-02-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-07-commons	The Secretary of State just said that we are no longer beneficiaries of EU regulation. It was not until the EU acted that the mobile companies got rid of the dreaded mobile roaming charges. How many mobile companies have come to the Secretary of State and said that they will voluntarily not put these charges on to consumers?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-07-commons.u223	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-07	Dakin, Nicholas	Mobile roaming charges concern raised	2019-02-07 00:00:00	2019-02-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords	If there was inaction for the past six years, that covers a period when we were both Ministers together in the coalition Government. The noble Baroness asked whether it was fair to ask people to wait. What we propose would bring a swifter solution to those who have already waited a long time—as I agree—than the alternative of a statutory scheme which, as I said, requires primary legislation, regulations controlling SME lending, which is not regulated at the moment, and then possibly expensive access to the tribunal through legal representation for SMEs The banks have a good record of observing the recommendations of the financial ombudsman scheme, so we should let them have the opportunity to show that they will also honour the recommendations of the two schemes being announced today, which will be up and running in the autumn—far sooner than a statutory scheme.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords.u157	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-19	Young, George	Swifter solution without statutory scheme	2019-03-19 00:00:00	2019-03-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-lords	Exactly—balancing the economy outside London and the south-east. I have the platform and can now unburden. When people say that we need regional rail more than we need HS2, or vice versa, I say that we need it all in the north. It is about time that we started to connect people to jobs more easily. My noble friend Lord Heseltine asks how we can differentiate rural and urban: actually, we all need to access skills and education and bring places of work nearer to us.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-lords.u188	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Williams, Susan	Invest in Northern infrastructure	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-25-commons	I warmly congratulate the Government and the Secretary of State on introducing this Bill. I think I have married more people than anybody else in this House, in the transitive use of the word. I was always painfully aware that, when two people come together, it may well be that, in the end, they need to part, but the idea that they would have to prove in court all sorts of reasons for why the marriage had fallen apart—relying on the common law understanding of adultery, for instance—is just nonsense and adds to the sense of pain that there could already be within a family.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-25-commons.u175	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-25	Bryant, Christopher John	Praises divorce law reform bill	2019-06-25 00:00:00	2019-06-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords	My Lords, in Committee we had a useful debate on the impact of the Bill on children. The amendment I moved on that occasion required that the best interests of children should be considered in the divorce process. In his response, the Minister said, among other things: “I understand why some may regard it as important for the court to consider the impacts on children of the decision to divorce, but that ought not to be a matter for the divorce process. The decision to marry or divorce is an autonomous one. It is not for the law to stand in the way of one or both parties who no longer wish to be in a marriage. The legal process of divorce should focus only on ending the legal relationship between the adult parties. Issues that may arise from the divorce, such as disputed arrangements for children, can and are dealt with now under separate statutory provision. ” —[Official Report, 3/3/20; col. 549. ] Taken as a whole, the Minister’s response made two main points. First, he claimed that while the decision to marry involved two people, the decision to divorce need involve only one person and is as such an “autonomous decision” that engages neither the spouse nor the children. This was not to say that the best interests of children were irrelevant but, rather, that they are engaged outside the legal process of divorce and protected through provisions such as those in the Children Acts. Secondly, he expressed the concern that the requirement to take into consideration the best interests of children could be used to prevent the divorce taking place if the divorce were deemed to be not in their best interests While it is not my intention to table any amendment that would prevent a couple who want to divorce from divorcing, I am deeply concerned about doing anything that authenticates an ethic of autonomous decision-making in family life. When two people marry and bring children into the world, they change the world through those children, who are very properly dependent on them throughout childhood. They use their autonomous choice to create a family unit of dependents and interdependence, in which anyone who is committed to the notion of responsibility must acknowledge that they say goodbye to autonomous decision-making, in the sense of decision-making based entirely on self, and engaging with the consequences for others only after the fact The thrust of government policy in seeking to fix “broken Britain” has been all along about helping fathers and mothers recognise that they must live up to their responsibilities, not escape them by falling into the ethic of autonomous decision-making. The hyper-individualism of the ethic of autonomous decision-making is the root cause of the broken Britain phenomenon, which the Conservative Party in opposition pledged itself to repair. In consequence, it makes no sense that, once in power, the Conservatives should instead give a shot in the arm to the hyper-individualism that they previously committed to curtail. In this context, rather than encouraging ethical autonomous decision-making, it is vital that divorce legislation in 2020, while not blocking the break-up of the family unit, should encourage adults with dependants to make decisions that are fully cognisant of the implications of those decisions on others, including their children This is absolutely relevant to the divorce process because it is one of decision-making. That is reflected in the three stages of the process as set out in the Government’s consultation paper, Reducing Family Conflict: the petition, the decree nisi and the decree absolute. The sense of the decision-making process negotiated through the first two stages is helpfully elucidated on page 32 of Reducing Family Conflict: “Although it is the making of the petition that puts the marriage on notice, so to speak, it is only at the stage of the decree nisi that the marriage has, at least provisionally, been found by the court to have broken down irretrievably. ” The dictionary definition of putting in notice is, “a formal announcement, notification, or warning, especially an announcement of one’s intention to withdraw from an agreement. ” The first part of the divorce process is therefore not set out in terms that suggest that the divorce is necessarily going to happen. We are looking at an indication of intention The provisional nature of that initial putting on notice period is further underlined by the designation of the 20-week period between initiating the petition and the application of the conditional order as the reflection period. It is during this reflection period that the Government have said on numerous occasions that they hope it might be possible to save a marriage. For example, in their response to the consultation process, the Government state on page 17: “The law can, and should, have a role in providing couples with an opportunity to reflect on their momentous decision and pull back from the brink if they decide that reconciliation is achievable. ” In other words, at this stage we are not dealing with a process where decision-making is over In the context of the decision-making process facilitated within the legal process of divorce, it is very important that couples with children think about the impact that the divorce is likely, given the current social science research, to have on their children. In order to help them think this through, it is vital that they are empowered to make informed decisions through the provision by the Lord Chancellor of a “concise, accessible statement of the main findings from the relevant social science discipline about the impact of divorce on different aspects of a child’s well-being. ” This is a modest but important amendment. It does not block divorce but simply seeks to empower a couple to make decisions about divorce that are informed by an awareness of the likely impact on their children I suggest that we cannot expend energy on seeking to block such a provision unless we want to risk being seen to prioritise the convenience of adults over the best interests of children in a way that I—and, I feel sure, many others—would find disturbing. I very much hope that the Government will accept this amendment. I beg to move.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords.u141	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Howe, Elspeth Rosamund Morton	Consider children's impact in divorce	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons	The hon. Gentleman is generous in giving way again. Does he agree that that underlines the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol West (Thangam Debbonaire) on the importance of having DFID leading on this? DFID has that expertise and experience as a separate Department and, actually, some of the criticisms levelled by the National Audit Office and others—I am not an aid purist, and some important aid spending needs to be done in conjunction with other Departments, such as through the Stabilisation Unit, International Climate Finance and other institutions —have been levelled at spending when it has been done well but without the remit of DFID. We need to see DFID in a leading role, using its expertise to ensure our money is spent effectively.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons.u267	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-01	Doughty, Stephen John	DFID's leading role essential	2019-07-01 00:00:00	2019-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-commons	I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for initiating this debate and for continually highlighting developments in Hong Kong. I also express my gratitude for the contributions and sincere interest—perhaps silent interest in some cases—expressed by a number of hon. Members here, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham). Clarifying with the Hong Kong Government what these proposals will mean is clearly something that I intend to do in very quick order This was billed as a slightly more general debate, and given that we had an urgent question earlier, I do not wish to spend this time entirely by simply covering the same old ground, important though that ground is, but let me start with a few words about the UK’s relationship with China. We believe that we have a constructive relationship based on a strong economic partnership but also our position as leading nations of the world. The UK and China are both, of course, P5 nations of the United Nations. Trade and investment links are at record levels, and people-to-people links, particularly among Chinese students—the largest single cohort in the UK—are thriving The UK’s approach to China is pragmatic. It maximises the benefits of co-operation while doing its best to protect our national security. As G20 members with seats on the UN Security Council, the UK and China can do more than most to address a range of global challenges. From medical research to sustainable development, we have co-operated, and will continue to do so, for our mutual benefit in ways that support global prosperity, security and stability Of course, this partnership has its challenges. China’s growing influence is putting pressure on the global rules-based system, and we regularly express our very real concerns about issues, including its stance on human rights, its respect for certain international agreements and its failure fully to protect intellectual property. But we work with China where doing so is in line with our values and protects our national interests, including the security of our people and businesses. We are clear and direct where we believe that China’s actions are incompatible with those values The UK Government are acutely and continually aware of our historical responsibility towards Hong Kong, specifically as one of the joint signatories of the 1984 joint declaration that established the principle of one country, two systems. That joint declaration is a legally binding treaty registered, as I said, with the UN. Its objectives clearly apply to both signatories—the Government of the People’s Republic of China and the UK. It remains in force and remains relevant to the conduct of life in Hong Kong. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that it is remains faithfully implemented for the period up to 2047, as the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) rightly mentioned The one country, two systems principle provides Hong Kong with the foundations for success as a truly global financial centre and prosperous world city, as touched on by my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce). It safeguards Hong Kong’s capitalist economic system, its high degree of autonomy, its system of common law, its independent judiciary, and the rights and freedoms of its people and those who are lawfully residing there. However, as the Government’s most recent six-monthly reports have made clear, we believe that important areas of the one country, two systems framework are coming under increasing pressure. I take this opportunity to reassure the House that we engage in an ongoing and frank dialogue—a sometimes private, but frank dialogue—with the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities about the implementation of the joint declaration Turning to our relationship with the Hong Kong Government, I want to stress that we have warm, constructive and positive links across a wide range of other issues. As an example, just last month, I joined the start of the inaugural UK-Hong Kong Government-to-Government financial dialogue, led on our side by the Economic Secretary to the Treasury. This involved the two Governments discussing co-operation between our globally leading financial services centres, building on rich industry-to-industry links. I welcome the decision for the UK to be the partner country for Hong Kong’s Business of Design Week this year. It is the largest design festival in Asia and it is our pleasure to support Hong Kong in this area. It is also a great opportunity to showcase the global reputation of the UK’s creative sector It is also right that we take the opportunity to turn our minds collectively to the ramifications of the Hong Kong Government’s contentious proposals to change their extradition laws, following a highly publicised homicide in Taiwan, allegedly carried out by a Hong Kong national. Civil society groups, including organisations that represent legal professionals and businessfolk in Hong Kong, have aired deep concerns about both the content of the proposals and the short consultation period. They fear above all that Hong Kong nationals and residents risk being pulled into China’s legal system, which can, as the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland pointed out, involve lengthy pre-trial detentions, televised confessions and an absence of many of the judicial safeguards that we see in Hong Kong.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-commons.u444	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-10	Field, Mark Christopher	UK-China relations; Hong Kong concerns	2019-06-10 00:00:00	2019-06-10 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons	I welcome my right hon. Friend’s support. To answer his question, that is something that we monitor with the help of Home Office officials. If that does happen, we will bring a relevant order to Parliament, as we did recently with another terrorist group that had previously been proscribed. It is something that we try to stay on top of and make sure that there is no way for these terrorist groups to dodge proscription by the UK Government.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-26-commons.u473	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-26	Javid, Sajid	Monitoring terrorist groups	2019-02-26 00:00:00	2019-02-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-lords	My Lords, first, the Victorian signalling system has been in use for about 200 years. What plans are there to modernise the system, and what is the timetable for doing that? Secondly, as the development of the north-east is now a priority, what is the timetable for developing new rail lines laterally which will be accessible from the new HS2?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-lords.u52	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-09	McColl, Ian	Modernise signal system, develop rail	2020-09-09 00:00:00	2020-09-09 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-17-commons	I am not sure I am prepared to second-guess the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. My right hon. Friend is a very wise man—very wise, indeed—and he has a lot of experience in these matters, and no doubt he has his own views on the motive behind this attack. I think the important thing is that, whatever the motive, we just need to prevail on Tehran to turn the temperature down on this. I hope very much that we can encourage, procure and broker dialogue that will enable us to deal with this is in a pacific way that does not involve further escalation, which is in nobody’s interests.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-17-commons.u331	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-17	Murrison, Andrew William	Promote diplomacy with Iran	2019-06-17 00:00:00	2019-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons	My hon. Friend’s point is absolutely right, and she is right to raise it The point is this: those most in need of health services now experience the poorest quality of care. It is an absolute disgrace. This political stunt of an underfunding Bill will not deliver the scale of improvements that our constituents deserve. We will not divide the House tonight, but instead seek to amend the Bill. Let us be clear: the Government should have brought forward a fully funded financial settlement for our NHS and social care. The ever lengthening queues of the sick and elderly in our constituencies deserve so much better.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons.u390	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-27	Ashworth, Jonathan Michael Graham	NHS funding inadequate	2020-01-27 00:00:00	2020-01-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons	As you know, Mr Speaker, I did not vote for you to become the Speaker when you were elected in 2009, and I am sure you will recall that I spent about an hour with you, sitting down at a table over a cup of tea and explaining all the reasons why I was not going to vote for you to become Speaker. I think that it is also fair to say, Mr Speaker, that we have had our disagreements, particularly on the decisions you have made over Brexit in recent times; I do not think that will come as a great shock to anybody either in the House or outside the House, but we have always conducted those conversations in perfectly civil terms Mr Speaker, you have always been immensely kind to me in my time in the House of Commons, not least during the preparations for our wedding—mine and Esther’s—next year, about which you have been especially kind. I must at this point pay tribute to Rose, the chaplain—an inspired appointment by you, Mr Speaker—who has been equally amazingly kind to me and Esther, and indeed is so kind that she has even offered to come back to conduct the service even after she has left, which is a mark of her as a person and which is very special for both me and Esther; we are very privileged that that has been the case. That was an inspired appointment by you, Mr Speaker, and you have been incredibly kind However, Mr Speaker, I think and hope you will be most remembered for your support for Back Benchers. As you know, I am a permanent Back Bencher, Mr Speaker, so this is more important to me than anybody else; as I always say, the one thing that the Prime Minister and I always agree about is that I should be on the Back Benches. You have always been a champion of Back Benchers, to allow everybody’s opinion, whatever it is, to be heard in the Chamber, and I have always been immensely grateful for that Some people have very short memories, but I remember when I first entered Parliament in 2005 in Question Times we barely got beyond Question 6 or 7 on the Order Paper and at Prime Minister’s questions those with a question after Question 10 had no chance of being called, to the great irritation of many colleagues who had spent ages trying to get on the Order Paper for Prime Minister’s questions only to find that they could not even get to ask their question. I do not think anyone could possibly go back to that kind of regime now; indeed, I do not think the House will allow any Speaker to go back to such a regime, and that is because of your making sure that Back Benchers get to have their say. That has made what I think will be a permanent change to the way that this House operates I have been very grateful for your friendship over many years, and the fact that you came to my constituency and spoke at Beckfoot School, which those there particularly cherished. I hope we will stay in touch after you have finish your term, Mr Speaker, and I wish you every success for the future.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons.u232	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-31	Davies, Philip Andrew	Gratitude to Speaker for support	2019-10-31 00:00:00	2019-10-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons	Our planning system is not fit for purpose. I am sure that Members across the House agree that it needs urgent reform, but the Government’s proposals do not offer the solutions for my constituents in Vauxhall The current system is already weighted in favour of local councils and developers, and the Government now want to frontload local participation towards development of the local plan and away from individual applications. That will not benefit my constituents, many of whom are already involved in long-running battles to protect their quality of life and the homes and communities that they love so much and have invested in over so many years. In my experience, that is not about nimbyism or vexatious complaints. My constituents have valid, legitimate concerns and I support them in their battle to ensure that their homes, streets and neighbourhoods are not blighted by unsympathetic developments. We must remember that, at the end of the day, when the planning officials and developers have left, they are not the ones who have to live in the area and suffer the consequences of the developments. My constituents and your constituents will. I have seen long-established, stable communities broken up and divided by inappropriate planning decisions, whereas if we invest in and contribute to these communities, they will create the social cohesion and collective wellbeing we all want Last week, I had the pleasure of welcoming the Earl and Countess of Wessex to Vauxhall City Farm in my constituency. They were able to meet local schoolchildren, the staff and the trustees in the community centre, which was built by a section 106 development. The Government have promised that the new planning system will develop at least as much affordable housing, if not more, yet we have no detail on what mechanism will replace section 106 and the community infrastructure levy It goes without saying that it is fundamental for our democracy, whereby we govern with consent, to allow constituents and local residents to have their say at every stage of the process. Does the Minister agree with the 61% of Conservative councillors in a recent poll who said that the reforms will make planning less democratic? We must ensure that we think about the people who are going to bear the brunt of these proposals, and I ask the Minister to come back with an answer to that.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-08-commons.u251	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-08	Eshalomi, Florence	Criticizing proposed planning reforms	2020-10-08 00:00:00	2020-10-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons	It is very kind of the hon. Lady to give way. I spoke in the debate and said that we have some very difficult decisions to face. We need to be open with the public, and I said that we need to look at, for example, equity in residential property. I think that is unavoidable. Does she think we should do that?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-commons.u369	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-24	Cartlidge, James Roger	Difficult decisions on property equity	2019-04-24 00:00:00	2019-04-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons	The hon. Lady raises a legitimate issue in a constructive way, and I am very happy to work with her because she is championing a genuine issue on behalf of her constituents. There is always a balance in setting tariffs between protecting consumers and the issues for producers. It is about how we calibrate those two sometimes competing issues. She will understand that within the market— within the industry—there is domestic pressure, regardless of Brexit, but I am very happy to work with her on that issue.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons.u57	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-05	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Collaborative approach on tariffs	2019-09-05 00:00:00	2019-09-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	I know that the hon. Lady speaks about this subject with passion and knowledge, and that she has championed a number of those who have suffered in the past. She has highlighted a very important point. As she will know, the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Lucy Frazer), and I—along with members of the judiciary and others—are looking closely into what can be done to ensure that the family courts themselves continue to ensure that the voices of victims of child sexual abuse are heard, and that they are responded to appropriately.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u113	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Argar, Edward John Comport	Champion for child sexual abuse victims	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons	The hon. Lady has raised a very serious and important point. I think we should make that commitment, because people need an opportunity to see what rules of play will obtain on Monday and an opportunity to table amendments, and to consider, in the light of that, how to proceed. I believe that, if we are talking about tomorrow, Thursday—because the House is not currently due to sit on Friday—the sitting will be curtailed at approximately 5.30 pm, after the Adjournment debate. I therefore think—assuming that the House does not sit on Friday—that we should make a commitment to lay the Business of the House motion for Monday by 3.30 pm tomorrow, so that people have two hours in which to look at it and table amendments if they see fit Incidentally, I agree with the hon. Lady—it was part of the burden of what I was saying to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke)—that there is ample scope for thinking now, and in the succeeding hours, including tomorrow morning, about possible methods of voting on Monday to encourage, or even to ensure, some further convergence to reach a majority in favour of some alternative.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons.u219	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-27	Letwin, Oliver	Commitment to lay Monday's business	2019-03-27 00:00:00	2019-03-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-lords	My noble friend raises an important point about the responsibilities that China has. I assure him that we will push on that, not just through the contact group but through bilateral conversations with key partners. He will acknowledge that we remind China that the imposition of the proposed law in Hong Kong is in direct conflict with its international obligations under the joint declaration. As my noble friend knows, that treaty has been agreed by the UK and China, and registered with the United Nations. We will continue to push on that. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has made clear the actions that we will take if China continues to persist in imposing this law.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-lords.u27	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Ahmad, Tariq	China responsibility Hong Kong treaty	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons	I very much agree. There needs to be a voice for the approaching 55% of people in this country who were uncomfortable with the direction offered by the Conservative party manifesto. Although the result of the general election was clear, it does not mean that the Government can proceed without question, challenge or scrutiny. That is the point of many of our amendments.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons.u295	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-07	Blomfield, Paul Christopher	Opposition critical of government direction	2020-01-07 00:00:00	2020-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support. It is for future activities but I appreciate it I have visited the Strand Road police station in Londonderry on a couple of occasions to meet frontline officers—that is such an important part of the work done by the PSNI. PSNI officers from all parts of the community serve in Derry/Londonderry, which is incredibly important because it means that they can be true community officers on the ground, understanding what is happening through their intelligence work. Although there was a coded warning, the PSNI officers had identified the vehicle and had started to take action. The hon. Gentleman is also right to comment on the delivery driver. It must have been a horrendous experience for a pizza delivery driver to find a gun at his head and to be put in that situation. There can be no excuse for the activities of the terrorists on Saturday, which we condemn fully On the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, I reiterate what the Prime Minister said earlier. We are steadfast in our support for the agreement, but the hon. Gentleman is right that there is a power vacuum in Northern Ireland. I want it filled. I am not sure that the ERG has a specific policy on it, but it probably agrees with me in wanting to see politicians in Northern Ireland back doing the job they were elected to do, which is making decisions on behalf of their constituents.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-commons.u403	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-21	Bradley, Karen Anne	PSNI importance, condemn terrorism, power vacuum	2019-01-21 00:00:00	2019-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons	For Britain to be able to sell abroad, we need to be able to do two things simultaneously: understand what Britain has to sell abroad and understand the markets we are selling into. That is why my Department is bringing in a major change to rotate our staff from our international posts through our sectors in the UK, so that they can understand what the UK can do in terms of services and goods in a real-time way as well as understand the markets. It is not just about how many people we have in the market, but about how well they understand what is happening in the UK. I hope that this innovation will lead to an increased capability for the UK and improve our competitiveness vis-à-vis other exporting countries.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons.u13	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-11	Fox, Liam	Rotating staff for market insight	2019-07-11 00:00:00	2019-07-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	I concur on the benefits of our Labour health policy and how the Government should do much more to fund healthcare in this country. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a particular problem of retaining public sector workers in many high-cost areas? In areas such as Reading and Oxford—my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) is sitting in front of me—there is severe pressure on the NHS because of the relatively low pay of many skilled staff.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u485	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Rodda, Mathew Richard Allen	Support Labour health policy funding	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	My hon. Friend is right. Next week the national minimum wage will go up to £8.21, which is the highest it has ever been. Furthermore, the level at which people start to pay tax is rising to £12,500. It was not very long ago that people on very low incomes—as low as £6,500—could be paying tax, and that has changed under this and the previous Government.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u264	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	Rudd, Amber	Wages up, tax threshold raised	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons	I understand the hon. Lady’s frustration. It is totally reasonable for Members of this House to be extremely concerned in the absence of the announcement, but it would be even worse, I would suggest, if we made ad hoc announcements when different Government Departments were not quite ready to implement those effectively. We are talking about an unprecedented crisis, and therefore we will need to take unprecedented measures. It is important that we do that as swiftly as possible, but it is also important that we do it as effectively as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons.u153	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-19	Glen, John Philip	Need swift effective measures	2020-03-19 00:00:00	2020-03-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-commons	The chief investigator of the SFO led a taskforce in relation to covid, to assess all operational activity that was initially halted by the pandemic as part of the office’s wider recovery planning. In addition, general counsel for the Serious Fraud Office introduced virtual systems for reviewing cases and virtual processes. We have been monitoring the SFO closely and it has been performing well in very difficult circumstances.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-commons.u97	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-24	Ellis, Michael Tyrone	SFO recovery and virtual processes	2020-09-24 00:00:00	2020-09-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons	The hon. Gentleman will be aware that when the Home Secretary published the White Paper, he made it clear that this was the start of a year-long conversation about the proposal contained therein for us to move to a single system based on people’s skills and not on where they come from. He will also be aware that the Immigration Bill has recently moved into its Committee stage, and we heard evidence the week before last from a range of experts giving us the benefit of their views on salary thresholds, including the Migration Advisory Committee, which proposed the £30,000 threshold.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons.u102	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Nokes, Caroline Fiona Ellen	Immigration bill, skills-based system	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons	My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. I wonder whether he has noticed that on the Opposition Benches there is not a single Labour Back Bencher, not a single Liberal Democrat Back Bencher and not a single SNP Back Bencher. They used to make a song and dance about Europe; where are they?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons.u436	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Bone, Peter William	Opposition benches empty on Europe	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-commons	Of course I would be more than happy to meet my hon. Friend and the company in his constituency. The UK and many of our closest international defence partners do not use offset because it can distort the market and lead to reduced value for money, but we look at alternative ways to encourage more inward investment. That is why we are working closely with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, and we are aiming for 60% of the Boxer programme to be undertaken in the UK.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-commons.u121	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-25	Andrew, Stuart James	Defence investment collaboration	2019-03-25 00:00:00	2019-03-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-commons	I am sorry to hear that from my hon. Friend. Obviously, we rely on our regional airports, and it is absolutely vital that they continue to offer a good service. I am not sure whether the Aberdeen city region deal will offer any route forward, with new investment coming into the area, but I encourage my hon. Friend to raise his particular issue directly with Ministers at Transport questions.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-commons.u275	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-11	Leadsom, Andrea Jacqueline	Support for regional airports	2019-04-11 00:00:00	2019-04-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-commons	I say to my right hon. Friend that I am deeply disappointed by this decision. I have spoken at length to security officials, who will always say that defending in cyber-security is a game of catch-up—always catching up with the next algorithm change, and we can never guarantee that we spot it sometimes until too late. The reality of the 5G network is that it is fundamentally different. There will be less and less centralised function with more and more going to the periphery, which is exactly where Huawei will be. Given that he did not mention China as a threat to us in cyber-security—he mentioned only Russia—does he now believe that China is a threat to us in cyber-security; as he takes on those threats to us, does he think that he will now drive Huawei out of our future systems progressively, as quickly as he can?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-28-commons.u282	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-28	Duncan Smith, George Iain	Concern over Huawei in 5G	2020-01-28 00:00:00	2020-01-28 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-lords	Parliament passes laws initiated by government, and when Parliament passes, and indeed amends, those laws, it does not enter into the detailed prescription of government contained in this Bill. That is why this Bill and its predecessor, introduced earlier this year, represent so fundamental a breach of precedent. They were facilitated only by the fact that the Speaker in the other place decided to dispense with precedent and, as far as we are aware, to dispense with the advice he was given and to allow the Opposition to take charge of the business of the House I want to take the House back to the Second Reading of the referendum Bill in the other place—the Bill that provided for the referendum. That debate was introduced by the then Foreign Secretary, one Philip Hammond. He said that, “whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber” I repeat, “or parliamentarians in this Chamber” He said that the decision should be, “for the common sense of the British people”, and that this Bill, “delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised”. —[Official Report, Commons, 9/6/15; col. 1056. ] The Bill which provided for that referendum was of course passed by a very large majority, but the difficulty that we have faced ever since is that the British people delivered a result that Parliament neither expected nor wanted. I am happy to give way to the noble Lord.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-lords.u99	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-05	Howard, Michael	Breaching parliamentary precedent on legislation	2019-09-05 00:00:00	2019-09-05 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-lords	It is not a sporting festival. I completely agree with the noble Lord’s previous point about diversity. Arts Council England is paying particular attention to that. He will have seen that the annual report mentioned diversity in the arts and culture sector. Equality, Diversity and the Creative Case was published in February this year.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-lords.u34	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-18	Ashton, Thomas	Diversity in arts emphasized	2019-03-18 00:00:00	2019-03-18 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons	I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s clarification, but my concern—I may well have read the Bill incorrectly—is that we are talking not just about majority or minority, but about where the majority or minority lies. At the moment, the majority has to be within every class of creditors, and there might be a disabusing minority within those instances. Under this legislation, an entire class of creditors could become a minority, and even though they all agree that they do not like the arrangement, for example, they will be forced to accept it. I think that that is a difference of approach. If we are giving that power to the courts, it is important for us and for the Government to be clear about the pattern that is likely to emerge, because in that respect the provision is different and new I think that the Secretary of State has answered my next question, but I will ask it again if I may. Will the clauses that are designed to be temporary measures sunset automatically without a subsequent affirmative statutory instrument proceeding in the House? Will they be subject to the negative procedure, or continue without an SI to cancel them? I would be grateful if the Minister could clarify that at some point, perhaps in his closing remarks if he has the time It is relevant to raise the issue of companies and sectors that may take time to recover, beyond the relevant period. I think that is addressed in Opposition amendments 3 to 6. What if the directors themselves cannot reach a clear judgment that fully escapes the risks of wrongful trading? What is the position of someone on a directorship in this situation who reaches a dissenting opinion to the majority of directors on the important issue of whether the organisation is able to continue trading? That is another issue of detail that the Minister may wish to address in Committee The impact assessment for the Bill does not appear to address the cost of debt from these changes, essentially assuming that changing what has historically been a situation that favoured senior debt to one that is a little bit looser between different classes of debt would have no impact on how much that debt might be priced at in the future. But it is my understanding that increasing risk on an instrument might cause an increase in the price on it. That may have been considered in the impact assessment and have been negligible, but it would be interesting to see what the Government have to say I am interested in what happens in the circumstances that arise under the chapter 11 equivalent proceedings when the Government are a debtor or a shareholder in a business. Do the Government have a voice that is different from any other creditor? The contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) was interesting in this regard, as he highlighted the part of the Bill where HMRC becomes a preferred creditor. Well, those of us who have had to deal with HMRC as a creditor in the past would not mark it down as one of the most amenable of creditors when it comes to its own interests, and that is putting it lightly. In fact, as we are seeing in this Parliament already, HMRC is acting, both in the Treasury and in general, somewhat as a bovver boy in British industry. It does not seem to like people who are self-employed and it certainly does not like people who have a loan charge. Now it seems to want to have priority in the debt structures of our companies. Where will its ambitions end? Where will this Government’s facilitation of the taxman’s ambitions end? As a Conservative, I would have hoped that they would have ended some time ago. Perhaps I can tempt my hon. Friend the Minister to comment on that.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons.u410	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-03	Fuller, Richard Quentin	Concerns about creditors' majority rules	2020-06-03 00:00:00	2020-06-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords	Yes. The Government plan to leave the European Union by the end of October and then we will indeed be able to get on with some of the other pressing issues. But I make the point that the Government have been taking action that does not require legislation. We had the Statement yesterday repeated by my noble friend about the 10-year NHS implementation plan. We have had Statements about zero carbon and about a breathing space for those in debt. We have announced 22 new free schools. So it is not the case that pressure on legislation is crowding out important initiatives that drive up the quality of life in this country.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords.u26	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Young, George	Government priorities beyond Brexit	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-lords	My Lords, it is welcome news indeed that the Queen has approved plans for a Platinum Jubilee medal. The Diamond Jubilee medal was given to some 465,000 people from the Armed Forces, to the fire, police, ambulance and lifeboat services, to coastguards and those working for mountain rescue. Would my noble friend consider increasing the number of medals, perhaps to 550,000, and widening the criteria to mark the extraordinary work of so many people during the pandemic, including NHS front-line personnel and, possibly, postal and other workers?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-lords.u121	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-16	Balchin, Robert George Alexander	Support for more Jubilee medals	2020-11-16 00:00:00	2020-11-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons	My hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) set out very clearly and comprehensively the problems with this Bill in his opening remarks. I do not want to repeat them all, but I will summarise the core reasons why the official Opposition cannot support the Bill The Conservative Government often mix their metaphors when presenting their Brexit process. This Bill, for example, part of what the Government have described as an onshoring process, is presented as dealing with those so-called in-flight measures that have not yet landed. In my brief remarks, I want to explain why many of us are confused about the identity of the pilot of this plane, quite how far and fast the plane will go, and indeed whether it should be on the runway in the first place. I suppose that it is at least a relief that the Transport Secretary is not in charge, given last weekend’s revelations First, who will decide which parts of in-flight EU legislation will be implemented? This is straightforward for those Bills that have already been passed at EU level but not yet implemented—those taxiing on the runway. In that case, the Bill commits itself to implementation in the UK, not least given that UK Ministers and MEPs would have been fully involved, one would hope, in all aspects of that legislation, with Government only able to fix deficiencies in that legislation The picture is, however, far less clear for legislation still under discussion at EU level, and thus to a certain extent still up in the air. In that regard, we are informed that this Bill will enable “the Government to choose to implement only those EU files, or parts of those files, which it deems beneficial to the UK” They will be able to “adjust the legislation as it is brought into domestic law to fix any deficiencies or, in the case of files still in negotiation, to ensure that it reflects the UK’s position outside of the EU. ” How exactly they might do so, and what that reflection might encompass is left unclear. The right hon. Member for Loughborough (Nicky Morgan), Chair of the Treasury Committee, rightly raised this earlier in an intervention on the Minister, and I am disappointed that she did not receive a sufficiently clear response to that question; I will return to that point later. Indeed, there is no indication here that that deviation from EU practice will even be flagged up to this place, let alone go through a different decision-making process as a result. Instead, it is expected that, as usual with this Government, sadly, statutory instruments will be used. Clause 1(1)(b) even states that the Government can make “any adjustments the Treasury consider appropriate”, a power that was initially open-ended but that, quite rightly, was amended in the other place The point remains that it will be difficult for Parliament to be aware of any deviations from EU practice. The Conservatives may well respond by stating that industry would be quick to point them out. Frankly, I am grateful for industry’s engagement with this process, to the extent that it has been able to input, and it is essential that, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde, we preserve our strong and successful financial services sector, and our regulations must reflect that. However, I reiterate a point I have made before: there is no organisation in the UK with an explicit mandate to promote financial stability and the consumer interest in financial services, a role which is filled within the EU by the Finance Watch. It is unsurprising therefore that Finance Watch has put on the record its concerns that the current approach to Brexit could be used as a means to undermine financial regulation, pointing to, for example, the Chequers agreement’s phraseology of the UK pushing for greater liberalisation of financial services, investment and procurement markets post Brexit The second reason to reject the Bill concerns its peculiar status among the rest of the so-called onshoring process. The flight path here is bedevilled with interactions with numerous other legislative processes, from those embedded in the 40 statutory instruments that have already been laid before Parliament to the additional 20 yet to go, and with only 34 working days between now and 29 March, as rightly underlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde By contrast, with the extraordinarily rushed process being adopted here, the Government’s powers under this Bill can be exercised for up to two years—yes, two whole years after Brexit. That is in a context where the Government have no clear plan for financial services regulation post 29 March. Rather than this confusion of legislation—short-term, long-term and of indefinite duration; primary, secondary affirmative and secondary negative—we surely need to have some consolidated legislation covering this area. This confusion is of course part of a pattern, sadly, over recent years from Conservative Ministers, with Acts in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 having to correct or amend existing provisions. Indeed, we have been informed that there may well be correcting amendments to be considered even after the 60 statutory instruments and this Bill are passed Of course we had a good example of the deficiencies even within this Bill, as rightly pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield (Mary Creagh), in relation to the legislation governing environmental indicators and reporting, which was initially missed off the schedule. I pay tribute to her for raising this essential issue of green finance and greening finance and how it was initially missed out of these proposals. I found the Minister’s response to the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Robert Neill) rather peculiar; I note that the hon. Gentleman is no longer in his place, but I felt he made an important point. He asked whether the UK would keep in step with emerging provisions from the EU, such as in the area of non-performing loans. The Minister suggested in response that alignment in this Bill was rejected due to the content of those proposals, when his Bill, however, was presented as inclusive of all financial services legislation that was in-flight aside from those elements that we had specifically opted out of, such as those relating to banking union, which we do not participate in of course and which is presumably the real reason why non-performing loans legislation is not included here My hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield highlighted in her remarks the non-scientific nature of the assessment by this Government of which measures will be deemed in-flight or otherwise. We have had no indication of the criteria to be used for that from Government. The discussion we have had, albeit in this brief debate, has pointed up that all we have as a Parliament currently as an indication of this Government’s approach to regulating financial services in the future is this Bill and the no-deal SIs—no overall plan, no indication of how the different pieces fit together, and above all no clarity around how we will be able to keep in step with the EU27 in relation to emerging issues like green finance and cryptocurrencies.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-commons.u410	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Dodds, Anneliese Jane	Opposition rejects unclear Brexit bill	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons	In the light of the conversations that took place yesterday and the statement from the President of the European Council, I am quite glad that we will have provision in a week’s time—if it is necessary, and I hope that it will not be—to ensure that essential supplies and medicines can come into the country. Of course, if the hon. Gentleman does not want a no deal, his party could climb off its high horse and support the Prime Minister’s deal.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons.u84	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-21	Grayling, Christopher Stephen	Support the Prime Minister's deal	2019-03-21 00:00:00	2019-03-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	The hon. Lady has focused on an important driver of these statistics: the surprising rise of inflation. In the year in question, inflation was 2.8% when it was not expected to be. That was one of the factors contributing to the rise in the number of people in poverty in that year. However, I believe that the changes that we have made since then will help to address that, so that people can have higher levels of consumer purchasing power at home.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u302	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	Rudd, Amber	Unexpected inflation increased poverty	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons	I agree entirely with the points the hon. Lady is making. Something that was absent from the Queen’s Speech was progressing the work on modern day slavery. I give credit to the former Prime Minister for the leadership she has shown on this issue, but it is clear that we need to do more on progressing the security and support given to victims of modern day slavery.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons.u119	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-16	McMahon, James	Support for modern day slavery action	2019-10-16 00:00:00	2019-10-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons	As we have heard in the contributions so far, serious violence is always an emotive subject for the public and for Members of this House. Sadly, given the recent knife crime epidemic in London and many other parts of England, it is an issue that we have had to discuss far too often in recent times. Of course, the adoption of the public health model to tackle serious violence in Glasgow and Scotland is not news to Members—indeed, it has already come up in this debate—but thanks to Police Scotland and the work of the violence reduction unit, levels of non-sexual violent crime have reduced significantly in Scotland, and the approach has been welcomed and advocated by the World Health Organisation. That reduction has been most apparent in west and central Scotland, and in Scotland’s cities more generally. Glasgow used to be known as the murder capital of Europe, yet it is now one of the safer cities in these islands. But despite this undoubted success, there is still a long, long way to go, and the Scottish Government are committed to tackling violent crime head-on, whatever form that takes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons.u317	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-15	Newlands, Gavin Andrew Stuart	Violence reduction progress in Scotland	2019-05-15 00:00:00	2019-05-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons	From the continuity agreement, exports to Chile have grown on average by 16% a year and consumers in the UK have benefited from lower prices on fruit, nuts and excellent Chilean wine. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Chile, I ask the Secretary of State what further progress will be made to ensure that that trading relationship with Chile goes from strength to strength?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons.u126	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-18	Cameron, Lisa	UK-Chile trade relationship improvements	2020-06-18 00:00:00	2020-06-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords	I know that the noble Lord will understand that I will not relay details of operational conversations. However, I will quote a Member of Your Lordships’ House, the noble Lord, Lord Hogan-Howe, who said that while the factors are multifaceted, one thing he is clear about is the rise in the demand from the drugs markets. While not directly related to it, some of the work that the NCA did the other week in taking drugs and weapons out of circulation will undoubtedly have eased some of the problems that our young people face.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords.u98	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-21	Williams, Susan	Drugs demand impacts youth problems	2020-07-21 00:00:00	2020-07-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons	It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Justin Madders) I am deeply concerned that the relentless increase in hardship, struggle and poverty means that we have become dangerously acclimatised to it. Just imagine for one moment that we had woken up after the 2010 election and could see with fresh eyes the world that we have created around us. How shocked would we be to see that the number of people waiting over 18 weeks in the NHS has gone up to 4.4 million and that a recent report on adult social care said that people are being pushed into inappropriate care settings that do not meet their need The scandals keep coming over and again. We hear that 81% of our mental health trust leaders say that they are unable to meet the needs of their children with mental health problems. There is an unprecedented—I quote, “unprecedented”—rise in infant mortality. Since 2010, rough sleeping has increased by 165%; education spending has been slashed by over £7 billion; knife crime offences are at the highest ever level; there has been a 27% increase in the number of people being home educated, indicating the lack of faith that many parents of children with special educational needs and disabilities feel in the current schools system—and so much more We have a creeping normalisation of poverty and struggle. We retreat and speak only to those who act and speak like us. Our social media reinforces the views of those we already agree with through the algorithms that they use. We have become conveniently blind to the reality that so many people face. Channel 5 puts out its poverty porn programmes every single week. We are building this narrative that there is somehow a difference between the deserving and the undeserving poor. We look down on the undeserving poor as people lacking aspiration and having a poor work ethic, until the moment it happens to somebody we love, and they hit the rocks—until life happens. I think of the family in Hessle who told me that they had all along believed that if people play by the rules, work hard and pay their taxes, they will be rewarded later on, until their mother had a stroke. They lacked the stroke rehabilitation services that she needed. There was no care package waiting for her when she left hospital, and because she was left on her own without adequate care, she fell, broke her hip and ended up back in hospital, where she deteriorated further. I think of the parents of children with special educational needs who, at a meeting with me just last week, broke down in tears while telling me about having to remortgage their property to go to a tribunal, because they cannot get the services that their child needs—because the resources are rationed and simply not available It appears in society right now that it is only possible to cope under this Conservative Government if people can guarantee that they and the people they love will never be in need. The Conservatives have ripped the heart out of our public sector, and this Prime Minister is fooling no one with his grab-bag of populist pronouncements masquerading as a Queen’s Speech. Like the leader of the Liberal Democrats, he was an enthusiastic member of a Government who chose cuts over investment. They have destroyed the social contract—the promise that if we work hard, the state will be there to help us when we need it—because hard work no longer guarantees a decent standard of living when one third of children in my constituency are living in poverty, many of them in working families It is time for Hull West and Hessle to have its fair share. It is time to enable our children to reach their potential and to have their needs met and their talents realised, and that will only happen when we have a Labour Government introducing our fantastic national education service. People need skilled, secure work. Labour’s pledge to a green new deal will give 11,000 jobs to people in my area in the offshore wind industry. Families need help with the cost of living. We need to look at reducing utility bills, with companies that act in the public interest, not the shareholders’ interests, and we need to increase the minimum wage. Most importantly, we want to say to everybody in our country: when life happens—when you fall down—the state will be there to pick you back up, with free NHS prescriptions, free hospital car parking and free adult social care, to treat everyone with the dignity and respect they deserve It is time for us all to break out from our bubbles and truly see the unequal UK that the Government have created. Unlike the right hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Sir David Evennett), I am not just aspirational as an individual or for individuals in my constituency; I am aspirational for my city and my country. I believe that the UK has a brighter future, but that brighter future does not exist under this Government. Our Labour values of equality, justice, fairness and compassion mean that only Labour will put the heart back into our public services and ensure that we can all rise together.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons.u208	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-16	Hardy, Emma Ann	Condemnation of increasing hardship under Conservatives	2019-10-16 00:00:00	2019-10-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons	In response to the hon. Gentleman’s first point, let me underline the Prime Minister’s commitment during her first days in office, when she spoke of her desire to see a country that worked for everyone and where no one was left behind. The fund that we have announced today is very much part of that agenda, because we want all parts of our United Kingdom to benefit. I have already mentioned the funds for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and I promise the hon. Gentleman that I will report back.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons.u513	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-04	Brokenshire, James Peter	Commitment to nationwide inclusivity	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons	Of course the big topic of this Budget had to be the coronavirus. We are facing the gravest health crisis in a century, and the Government have no greater responsibility at this time than to plan their response. I am aware that at this very moment we could be standing on the edge of an escalation in our response to this crisis. I am conscious that some people think that even to address other topics at this time might be seen as an indulgence, so I welcome yesterday’s news that the Government have immediate and effective plans to re-fund the response to the coronavirus. I particularly welcome the news that statutory sick pay will be available to help people who would not otherwise be eligible. Supporting people who are required to self-isolate during this crisis is as essential to dealing with the social impacts of the virus as the additional funding available to the NHS will be to dealing with the health impacts However, while a short-term injection of funds to address the immediate crisis might be an appropriate response to the coronavirus, the Chancellor appears to have extended this approach to the whole of his Budget. It was a litany of short-term emergency measures. His speech yesterday left a whole wasteland of ungrasped nettles. If this Conservative Government, at the beginning of a five-year Parliament with a majority of 80, cannot bring themselves to make some tough choices to re-programme our economy to meet the challenges of climate change, and to reset the course of this nation’s economic journey as we leave the European Union, when on earth will they The impact of business rates on town centre businesses is a matter of enormous concern in my constituency. We are seeing increasing numbers of empty shops and shopping parades across Richmond and Kingston. Town-centre shops are not on a level playing field with online retailers, who are taking increasing market share with goods that are routinely sold at below cost price. Bricks-and-mortar retailers are further disadvantaged by having to pay punitive levels of business rates calculated on the value of property that they operate out of, with no regard to their level of turnover. Major reform of business rates to maintain our town centres at the heart of our communities is long overdue and has been called for on many occasions by Members from all parts of this House. In our 2019 manifesto, the Liberal Democrats called for a landlord tax to be paid by those who receive the proceeds from the underlying value of the property. This would relieve small businesses of the burden of taxation altogether. It is precisely the kind of radical reform that is urgently required to save our town centres. There was much press speculation that the Chancellor might announce a measure of that kind in the Budget. It is therefore a huge disappointment to find that he has once again ducked the issue While the scrapping of business rates for the coming year to mitigate the effects of the coronavirus is surely welcome, it does nothing to resolve the long-term problem. The bills will return again in 2021, when businesses will face not only the after-effects of the coronavirus but the expiry of the transition period in our exit from the European Union. A short-term crisis measure does nothing to help businesses plan for the long-term or to build up resilience for the mixture of unexpected and self-inflicted shocks to the economy. I welcome news of a review of business rates and look forward to hearing its outcome, but it is disappointing that more was not done to grasp this opportunity now I have read the forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility, and I note that its economic outlook is informed by the assumption that the UK will make an orderly transition to a new trading arrangement with the European Union. Its forecast under those conditions is for a 4% downturn in GDP over 15 years. I was therefore surprised to hear so little mention of Brexit in the Chancellor’s speech. I know that the Prime Minister’s éminence grise has banned the use of the word, but to have so little reference to the major economic upheaval of our time in the first Budget after our departure from the European Union is nothing short of astonishing I am more sceptical than most about the Conservative Government’s promises of a bright new rainbow-filled future, but I nevertheless thought that there would be some opportunity that they would wish to take advantage of. We have thrown off the shackles, we are free to determine our own future—and we are going to stop charging VAT on tampons! Grateful as I am—and I am sure I speak for the rest of the female population—to save on average about £1 every year on the cost of my sanitary protection, I am somewhat surprised to find that this is the limit of the Government’s plans for our post-Brexit future. Is that really it? If I sound incredulous, it is partly because legislation to cut VAT on sanitary products was agreed by the European Parliament in 2018 and would have come into effect in 2022 I accept that negotiations are ongoing, but I would be grateful if the Government gave the House an update at the earliest opportunity of their plans for the talks next week in the light of the coronavirus and an estimate of how that will affect their plans to conclude the negotiations for the new free trade deal by the end of the year. I repeat the call that the Liberal Democrats have previously made: the negotiations should be halted and an extension to the transition period agreed, to account for the time that will surely be lost over the spring and into the summer in the efforts to manage the virus The OBR report references the fact that the major boost to Government income from this Budget is the reversal of the planned cut to corporation tax that was due to be implemented this year. The Liberal Democrats called for that reversal in their 2019 manifesto, and I am pleased to see that the Chancellor took up our suggestion. While we would not wish to see taxes on business set at a punitive or discouraging level, we believe that businesses should pay their fair share towards an equal society For the self-employed, the biggest missed opportunity of this Budget was the failure to address the enormous issues presented by the planned implementation of the IR35 legislation in the private sector. An uplift in the minimum income level for class 4 national insurance contributions is no consolation to those who face losing their livelihoods as organisations refuse to take on contractors or source their contracts from overseas, to avoid the unnecessary burden that the legislation will impose. It is not too late to halt the implementation and conduct a thorough review of the costs and benefits of this legislation For all of us, the largest nettle that goes ungrasped is our response to the climate emergency. The Chancellor announced funding for many new road schemes across the country but little for mitigating measures to reduce carbon emissions. The plans announced for carbon capture and storage are pitifully inadequate, and not enough is being done to invest in electrical vehicle charging infrastructure It is a particular shame that the issue of carbon emissions from domestic homes was not addressed, as the barrier to real change on that is the lack of funding. If we are to meet the Government’s net zero target by 2050, we need to start a comprehensive programme of retrofitting insulation to domestic homes and to install more efficient forms of domestic heating. Such a move would have a beneficial impact on domestic energy bills everywhere and, in particular, would alleviate fuel poverty in many homes. I want to reiterate the Liberal Democrats’ support for the Government in dealing with the coronavirus challenge in the months to come—[Interruption. ]	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons.u373	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-12	Olney, Sarah Jane	Support for coronavirus plans lacking	2020-03-12 00:00:00	2020-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-17-commons	I will absolutely look into that. That is exactly the approach we have taken with schools, and many universities’ labs are an important part of getting test results back. I am very happy to work with all of the 106 universities that are doing so much to ensure that the return of university is covid-secure, and I will look into the precise point the hon. Lady raises.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-17-commons.u247	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-17	Hancock, Matthew John David	Will investigate covid-secure universities	2020-09-17 00:00:00	2020-09-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-commons	In his statement, the Prime Minister said that “a dividing line between aid and foreign policy runs through our whole system,” but back in 1994, when that dividing line did not exist, we ended up with the Pergau dam scandal, when we poured billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money into a scheme to win a foreign trade deal on arms. That led to the introduction of the International Development Act 2002, to outlaw linking aid to foreign policy. Can the Prime Minister give us a guarantee that that is not his objective?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-commons.u276	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-16	Efford, Clive Stanley	Aid-policy separation questioned	2020-06-16 00:00:00	2020-06-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons	The hon. Gentleman is being very generous in giving way. He says that he can remember the time when gates were left open and animals wandered across the border. He suggests that we would have to avoid that. I am intrigued by this. For the life of me, I cannot understand how he believes that the EU Commission, with all its powers, is going to be able to instruct cows not to wander across the border and not to find holes in hedges, gates that have been left open or lanes that have been left unpatrolled. Could he please tell us how this will work, because I am intrigued?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons.u357	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-08	Wilson, Samuel	Border animal control EU skepticism	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons	I could not agree with my hon. Friend more. I remember that the hon. Member for Ogmore (Chris Elmore) said that we would hear about it at the ballot box, but we have heard the British public’s verdict on the Labour party’s economic policy. We heard it in 2010, 2015 and 2017, and we heard it decisively in 2019. I will never forget the feeling of disbelief and deep disappointment that I had when I first read the note that the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Liam Byrne) left in the Treasury when Labour were last in Government, saying that there was no more money left. Thank God we are a far cry away from the recklessness that we saw under the last Labour Government, and that is why I will be opposing the motion.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons.u265	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-09	Bhatti, Mohammad Saqib	Opposing Labour's economic policy	2020-09-09 00:00:00	2020-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-13-lords	My Lords, the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission has reported that not only did the police and military target members of the MDC, the opposition party, and civil society organisations, their offices were broken into and their membership files downloaded. Subsequently, beatings were carried out and arrests made late at night. What assessment have the Government made of this escalation in premeditated human rights abuses, particularly—as the noble Lord mentioned—in regard to factoring in opposition party membership when assessing asylum seekers’ claims in this country?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-13-lords.u70	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-13	Chidgey, David William George	Zimbabwe human rights abuses escalation	2019-02-13 00:00:00	2019-02-13 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons	It was good to see members of the armed forces and the Secretary of State herself at the Pride event in London at the weekend. Last year, a departmental assessment of the privatisation of the fire and rescue service at the Ministry of Defence gave Capita the highest possible risk rate. Two months ago, following a court challenge and an £80,000 payment to Serco, the lead competitor, Capita was finally given a contract worth millions to deliver services all over the world, despite the huge financial risk. Why was £80,000 paid to Serco to allow that to go ahead? Does that not show up the whole problem with privatisation at the Ministry of Defence?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons.u38	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-08	McDonald, Stewart Malcolm	Privatisation issues at Defence Ministry	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	My hon. Friend is making a great speech. On the lack of certainty beyond 2022, are not those in farming communities planning a long way ahead for what they intend to do with their land? Certainty beyond 2022 would help them in their long-term planning for their stewardship role as well as for trying to make money.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u379	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Blackman, Kirsty Ann	Certainty needed for agricultural planning	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords	The NHS Medical Director has made it clear that the NHS has carefully planned to make sure that we can deal with additional demand using, as the noble Lord has rightly said, the mobilisation of the Nightingale hospitals and through partnerships with the independent sector. They will ensure that this is rolled out as and when it is needed. I am sure that they will be cognisant of the situation in Blackburn and will be monitoring it very carefully.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords.u240	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-24	Evans, Natalie	NHS prepared for additional demand	2020-11-24 00:00:00	2020-11-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-10-commons	As many people may have noticed, I have not been in this Chamber as much as I might have liked over the last three months. As the House will know, I was acquitted just yesterday in Southwark Crown court of all charges relating to the 2015 general election. I know that business questions are generally a call for debate, but in respect of election law we fundamentally need legislative change. In this area, it is surely unacceptable that innocent people are dragged through the courts, at enormous expense to the public purse, on the back of abstract law My case went through a variety of court processes prior to trial. In March, the Appeal Court, in front of the Lord Chief Justice, agreed with the long-held principle that election expenses can only be so if authorised by a candidate or agent. The Supreme Court, in July last year, overturned that view to one of mere use, whether authorised or not The opportunity for ne’er-do-wells to get involved in election processes and cause prosecutions is surely obvious. Everyone acknowledges that there are huge grey areas between the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000—it deals with what is usually called the national spend—and the Representation of the People Act 1983, which covers local spend. Electoral Commission guidance is confused and sketchy. I would not want anybody in this House, from either side, to go through what I have been through over the last three years. Surely, it is in the interests of the House and all Members that we have clear and unambiguous law, and I hope that a campaign for clarity in this area will be supported across the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-10-commons.u190	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-10	Mackinlay, Craig	Acquittal, election law needs change	2019-01-10 00:00:00	2019-01-10 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-commons	T6. I am very proud to be part of a party that is delivering on leaving the EU and that is investing billions in our health and education sectors. Will my right hon. Friend outline the steps that his Department is taking on public procurement to make sure that that money is spent wisely?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-commons.u116	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-27	Coutinho, Claire Coryl Julia	Public procurement steps?	2020-02-27 00:00:00	2020-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	A number of Members across the House have been campaigning all their political lives to get this country free from the shackles of the European Union. Therefore, it is exceptionally good news that the European Union has recently changed its position on a comprehensive free trade agreement and that Mr Barnier is coming to London this afternoon to try to finalise that deal. Will the Leader of the House recommend to the Prime Minister that Parliament should be recalled next week for a statement and a debate if such a historic agreement is reached?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u238	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Bone, Peter William	EU comprehensive trade agreement progress	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons	I am not going to blame Europe—or anybody else, for that matter. I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman. We have been making big strides as far as procurement is concerned and, of course, after the end of the transition those strides will be even bigger—that does not constitute blame, of course. We have regular conversations in Government, including with the Welsh Government, about making sure that procurement not only offers value for money for taxpayers but taps into the wonderful supply chain that we have in the UK, of which he gave a very good example.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons.u50	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-16	Hart, Simon Anthony	Progress in procurement excellence	2020-12-16 00:00:00	2020-12-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons	My hon. Friend makes a good point. Nimco is effectively my Whip. Most of what I do in this place in relation to FGM is down to her wagging finger telling me exactly what and what not to do. At a recent event with her, someone described me as “Nimco’s intern”, but it is a great honour to be her intern. She is an extraordinary campaigner, and if I can help her in any way, it is an honour to do so Members will be familiar with the horrors of FGM, but I think they bear repeating to remind us why this issue matters so much and why it should matter to everyone here. According to the World Health Organisation, female genital mutilation includes “all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. ” FGM is almost always carried out on very young children, rarely by medical professionals and rarely with pain relief.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons.u429	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Goldsmith, Zac	Honoring Nimco's anti-FGM campaign	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I certainly had no correspondence about the matter myself, nor as far as I am aware did any of my officials, but if there is anything to be said, I think the hon. Gentleman has written to the Cabinet Secretary, and I know that he will be writing back.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u113	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Awaiting Cabinet Secretary's response	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-18-lords	My Lords, I start by saying how much I agree with what a number of noble Lords have said about the nature of debate in this sterile House, and I hope that we can certainly move on. I think it is important to say that because, as noble Lords might expect, I am not going to be saying much else which will find favour with other noble Lords who have spoken in this debate I respect the concerns about protecting the powers of the devolved Administrations which lie behind the amendments in this group, but I believe that these amendments would not be helpful in the context of the internal market and might well be very harmful. There is no exact correlation between what the common frameworks cover and the UK’s internal market covered by the Bill. Indeed, the functioning of the internal market is only one of six objectives of the common frameworks programme. Not every common framework will have a UK internal market dimension, and not every aspect of the UK internal market is included in the common frameworks programme So if Amendment 1 is agreed to, we will have uncertainty from day one about which bits of the common frameworks would override the market access principles. Uncertainty kills businesses. Uncertainty might be resolved only by the courts, and that could take five, maybe 10, years to bring to conclusion. Businesses cannot in general cope with timeframes of that nature, and that is especially true in today’s lockdown-harmed business environment The common frameworks are by their very nature detailed and specific. They are practical solutions to well-defined problems, such as compliance with international obligations. They do, however, have two big weaknesses. First, they have no guiding star, or no guiding principle, and they cannot, by their nature, cope with future change. By contrast, the internal market enshrined in the Bill is based on the overarching and enduring principles of market access, namely, mutual recognition and non-discrimination I am very clear that businesses want the Government to deliver an internal market which has as few barriers to trade as possible. They do not want to have to master thousands of pages of common frameworks, which may or may not impact the internal market, just to do business 10 miles away if that is over one of the UK’s internal borders. I have to say to the noble Baroness, Lady Randerson, that I have never even heard of the Aldersgate Group she referred to as representing business opinion, and I do not believe it represents the opinion of the whole business community In Committee, I urged noble Lords to consider the provisions of the Bill through the lens of businesses and individuals who will be trying to live, work and trade within the United Kingdom—that is what the Bill is about. By viewing the Bill through the lens of what the devolved Administrations think they might lose in terms of devolved competence, I believe that they may end up inflicting acts of self-harm on the people and businesses in their own territories I remind noble Lords of the high degree of dependence of the devolved nations on trade with other parts of the United Kingdom. This is an issue for Scottish businesses and residents, Welsh businesses and residents and Northern Ireland businesses and residents. It is important but not such a big issue for English businesses and residents. If trade is made more difficult, the result, as night follows day, will be higher cost and less choice for consumers. At a time of economic stress, that does not seem a sensible route to follow I have heard many arguments of principle adduced by the supporters of the amendments, but I have heard less about the practical issues. We heard about Scottish concerns on minimum alcohol pricing, but that was debunked in Committee. I believe that building regulations are a new red herring that has been introduced and will not conflict with the Bill. The Bill does not outlaw every variation within the UK, as some have tried to suggest. More importantly, I am still waiting to hear what will make life better for the businesses and residents of the devolved nations if the amendments are passed More than 90% of UK small and medium-sized enterprises, and nearly 60% of large businesses, trade only within the UK. That is the scale of the issues we are facing with the amendments. I hope that noble Lords will not jeopardise the aims of an internal market which works for the whole of the United Kingdom by pressing the amendments.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-18-lords.u132	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-18	Masters, Sheila	Support internal market reject amendments	2020-11-18 00:00:00	2020-11-18 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-06-lords	Oh my goodness. I have to say to the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, for whom I have great admiration, that I am struggling with that response because the words say that a letter should be sent by the Prime Minister requesting an extension in order not just to debate but to debate and pass a Bill. He has to send a letter saying he wants an extension because he is planning to pass a Bill to implement the May agreement, which has been rejected three times—the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, is absolutely right—and put in place the results of the discussions, on which I do not have information, other than what I have read in the newspapers. That is anticipating the decisions by the House of Commons My noble friend Lord Cormack said that he supported the May deal and that there are many people who supported the May deal, but the May deal was rejected by the biggest vote ever in the other place. The noble Lord, Lord Brooke, made a very good point about the political agreement and having discussions. He may be right in his criticism that not enough has been done to take that part of the thing forward. Taking out this defective part of the Bill does not prevent discussions taking place My noble friend Lord Hamilton made a crucial point that if this provision is deficient—and everybody agrees that it is deficient—what is this House for if not to deal with those matters? The noble Lord, Lord Rooker, said there is a matter of trust. I am most grateful to my noble friend Lord Callanan for his honesty and transparency. We were under the impression that the deal agreed between the Front Benches would result in this matter being taken out—he has confirmed that—and we are now being told that it is not being taken out because the legal advice is that it would not fly anyway, so we put into the Bill something which is legally deficient; that is okay, and that is what this House has come to. We do that because we do not believe that the Government will be as good as their word when the people who were on the other side of the agreement have not been as good as their word. I hope that the Government are rather better than that. We have a duty to pass legislation which is proper. I am not a lawyer, but the noble Lord, Lord Marks, told us that it would have no legal effect whatever, and my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay of Clashfern—not Drumlean —gave us the opposite advice, so it would appear that there is at least some doubt about whether it would have legal effect My noble and learned friend Lord Mackay said it was not meaningless and the noble Lord, Lord Marks, said he agreed that—I hope I am not pushing too far here—it should not be there but because it is meaningless, it could stay there. The noble Lord, Lord Jones, told us that the entire country is sick to death of all of us. On that, I am sure we can all agree.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-06-lords.u100	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-06	Forsyth, Michael Bruce	May agreement and legal deficiencies	2019-09-06 00:00:00	2019-09-06 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons	I thank the hon. Member for his question. As I say, the gov.uk website sets out the services that are available to victims of domestic abuse in these very troubling times, and of course helplines may be of particular use to older people who are not perhaps as familiar with online services as younger generations. In addition, we have announced £76 million in funding to help vulnerable people, with the Chancellor’s £750 million charities fund, and that includes victims of domestic abuse. Of course, the Bill itself will help to—	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons.u66	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-06	Atkins, Victoria	Support for domestic abuse victims	2020-05-06 00:00:00	2020-05-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-lords	My Lords, this has been a powerful debate and rightly so, given the seriousness of the issue. This Wednesday, 9 December, is the day that the United Nations will mark the adoption of the genocide convention. It is also the International Day of Commemoration and Dignity of the Victims of the Crime of Genocide and of the Prevention of this Crime. I wish to declare an interest in that I chair the UK board of Search for Common Ground, an international peacebuilding charity. Just before the lockdown I was in northern Iraq, where I have been more than 20 times, and Sudan, to which I have gone on many occasions. I have met the victims of the egregious crimes that have taken place in those two countries. Just last night, I was on an online video call with people in Baghdad who are still living with the situation from the north of Iraq which the noble Lord, Lord Alton, introduced. I commend his work in this House and the way that he introduced this group of amendments My noble friends Lady Northover and Lady Smith have indicated our support from these Benches and I need not repeat any of their arguments. We will work with the noble Lord and others, as indicated by the noble Lord, Lord Collins, in the previous group, to address some of the areas that have been referred to in the debate. For example, if it is a matter of the courts, which courts, and how do they interact with our treaties and agreements, both domestic and international? Would there have to be clauses and agreements, as the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, said, or is the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope, correct in saying that mechanisms are already in place? This can be discussed and identified Also, is this to be linked purely with preferential terms, which the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, indicated, or is it for all trade, as has also been indicated? There are consequences for both of those issues, and yes, they have to be agreed—as well as the interaction between our domestic courts and the mechanisms, which has not been raised so much. Genocide is of course one of the crimes under the International Criminal Court, which is different from those which can be triggered by the genocide convention. How do they interact with each other? These are all issues that I agree can and should be resolved through discussions Finally, I want to repeat to the Government from these Benches a clear call for a trade and human rights policy statement where a UK framework of atrocity analysis which can be integrated into our trade policy is agreed. It should be something where officials in the DIT, the Foreign and Commonwealth and Development Office and BEIS should be able to see proper links between judicial measures, human rights measures, trade agreements and our trading relationships. In the absence of a proper framework with atrocity analysis, we will not be doing what I believe that all in this House want the UK to be, which is a leader in the world, not for deciding on the hierarchy of suffering but on preventing the worst excesses of human rights abuses. We need the structures and the frameworks in our legal and trading methods to allow us to do that and I hope that the Government will finally respond positively to this debate.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-lords.u191	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-07	Purvis, Jeremy	Support for genocide prevention measures	2020-12-07 00:00:00	2020-12-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons	Forty-two per cent. of my constituents are in the rented sector and they have appreciated the moratorium over the past six months, but can I just bring my right hon. Friend back to an answer that he gave some moments ago? Can he confirm that, for areas in my constituency such as Sandwell, which is currently under local restrictions, there will not be any evictions during those local restriction periods?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons.u174	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-23	Bailey, Shaun Stephen	No evictions during restrictions?	2020-09-23 00:00:00	2020-09-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords	My Lords, the position is that there is a very real social issue, but not a legal issue, with regard to this matter. It is not possible simply to say that we will acknowledge all religious ceremonies of marriage, of any kind, as legally enforceable. That would actually expose people to greater harm in the long term. I am perfectly content to meet with the noble Baroness and others to discuss this matter. It would be sensible to defer such a meeting until we have the Law Commission’s terms of reference and consultation document in September of this year.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords.u15	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-30	Keen, Richard	Social issue not legal issue	2020-06-30 00:00:00	2020-06-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-commons	We will work as closely as we can with the airports and airlines serving Northern Ireland so that we can maintain that connectivity, because connectivity between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK is important. The Chancellor has made a commitment to review APD, and I have already outlined our manifesto commitment to deliver on short-haul APD in Northern Ireland Bill Presented Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57) Secretary Priti Patel, supported by the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Thérèse Coffey, Secretary Brandon Lewis, Justin Tomlinson and Kevin Foster, presented a Bill to make provision to end rights to free movement of persons under retained EU law and to repeal other retained EU law relating to immigration; to confer power to modify retained direct EU legislation relating to social security co-ordination; and for connected purposes Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 9 March, and to be printed (Bill 104) with explanatory notes (Bill 104-EN).	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-commons.u265	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-05	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Reviewing APD and EU Withdrawal	2020-03-05 00:00:00	2020-03-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons	I completely understand the requirements of business, including the manufacturers the hon. Lady mentions. It is essential that we be able to continue to trade, which is why I have always been clear—representing very strongly the views of small business and large business—that no deal should not be contemplated, but the way to avoid no deal is to do what the motor manufacturers, the Institute of Directors, the Federation of Small Businesses, the British Chambers of Commerce and all the business organisations say we should do, which is vote for the agreement that will come before the House next week.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons.u22	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-08	Clark, Gregory David	Vote for the agreement	2019-01-08 00:00:00	2019-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons	We will work that bank holiday if the hon. Gentleman is successful in getting it. Throughout his speech he has been railing against the “establishment”. I know he sees himself as a kind of mild-mannered, modern-day answer to the metric martyr here in Parliament, but the Brexit project is entirely of the establishment. Is he really asking us to believe that people such as Arron Banks are not the establishment? They are, and the hon. Gentleman is the establishment now, even if he does not want to believe it. But why does he want to take a leaf out of all of those European countries’ books, all those countries he is so desperate to get away from? Why is he so workshy, in wanting to have another bank holiday?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons.u476	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-30	McDonald, Stewart Malcolm	Brexiter accused of hypocrisy	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords	My Lords, the Minister has announced a White Paper on community sentencing and sentencing more widely, and that is to be followed by a government Bill. A royal commission will not examine those matters because they are already under way. So, having taken out a large chunk of the justice programme, what will be the main focus of what is left for the royal commission to examine?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords.u41	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-15	German, Michael	Royal commission's remaining focus?	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-12-commons	From his long experience of these things, my hon. Friend is making a cogent argument about the character of penalties. He might want to go further. The problem with the assumption about automatic early release is that it is injurious to the very principle that he set out. Early release has always been part of judicial considerations but on the basis of an assessment of risk, merit and worthiness. Automatic early release runs against those principles.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-12-commons.u217	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-12	Hayes, John Henry	Critique of automatic early release	2020-02-12 00:00:00	2020-02-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords	First, as the father of three young boys, I associate myself with the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Knight, about children being able to meet with other children from their school bubble, who they work with every day, outside the school. It is critical to their socialisation and enjoyment of the coming weeks More specifically, it only takes walking down the high street to see how many businesses have shut over the last months—permanently, not just for lockdown. Hospitality businesses are at enormous risk of long-term closure now if they are not able to operate during the critical weeks up to Christmas. Will the Government extend specific support beyond that already being given to them, as they will be required to miss their most important trading time?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords.u222	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-24	Taylor, Matthew Owen John	Support for children's socialization businesses	2020-11-24 00:00:00	2020-11-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords	My Lords, we welcome and fully support the principle behind Amendment 8, which underlines that the work should be carried out without delays and must be cost effective. The sponsor body has said it expects the current timeline for the project to be around 10 years, from the mid-2020s to the mid-2030s. Of course, there remains some vagueness around this length of time, and we hope the sponsor body is able to provide a more detailed timeline as soon as possible, with some clarity on milestones and gateways for both the decant and the completion of the full works. Obviously, this will most likely come after the business case has been presented and discussed by Parliament. Nevertheless, providing clear information on timelines and milestones will most certainly be important for public engagement and the engagement of staff and Members. We very much support this amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords.u117	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Wheeler, Margaret Eileen Joyce	Support Amendment 8's principle	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords	My Lords, clearly this draft legislation is causing a great deal of concern in Hong Kong and I am sure that the Hong Kong Government will wish to take account of that. That said, does the Minister agree that there is nothing in the draft legislation which offends against either the joint declaration between ourselves and China on the future of Hong Kong or the Basic Law, which is the constitution for Hong Kong? Does he further agree that the provisions do not in themselves offend against the independence of the judiciary in Hong Kong, which remains as important now as it ever was and always will be?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-lords.u79	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-11	Wilson, David Clive	Hong Kong legislation concerns judiciary	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-lords	My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord McNally, I too have found myself having to change what I had intended to say today, following an announcement by the Secretary of State for the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport last week that the Government no longer intend to implement Part 3 of the Digital Economy Act 2017. The profundity of this announcement and its political implications for the Government have not yet made their presence felt, for the simple reason that the announcement was made, probably on purpose, in the epicentre of the Brexit storm. The simple political reality, however, that the Government cannot escape, and the consequences of which they cannot circumvent, is that the 2015 Conservative manifesto stated, on page 35, that, “we will stop children’s exposure to harmful sexualised content online, by requiring age verification for access to all sites containing pornographic material” That was a simple, profound, high-profile manifesto commitment that brought hope to parents up and down the country and to children’s charities. You simply cannot make this kind of commitment, introduce the legislation, appoint a regulator, ask the industry to prepare for the law change and then suddenly make a U-turn and not expect serious political consequences The Government may have to face an election, and therefore they may want to think again too. The actions of the Secretary of State suggest that even seminal Conservative manifesto commitments cannot be trusted, so I gently ask the Minister why anyone should believe what they say after some of the events of last week. How will we know that key commitments will not subsequently be swept away because the Government claim to have better plans On the subject of better plans, one of my difficulties is that the Government have not really said what these better plans are, other than that they will find expression in the context of their work on online harms, further to the White Paper. This is particularly problematic because, although I have spoken to children’s charities and parents, no one has been able to tell me of a better way to prevent children accessing pornographic websites than through the introduction of statutory age verification enforced by a regulator IP blocking non-compliant sites. Moreover, no one can imagine a more efficient way of facilitating children’s access to pornographic content online from the day that statutory age verification would have come in than abandoning this commitment so that it does not come into force. Hopes had been expressed that the online harms White Paper process might extend that protection to social media but, let us be clear, nothing can take the place of statutory age verification in relation to pornographic websites. The best way to deal with pornographic websites is not necessarily the best way to deal with pornography on social media platforms, yet the Government seem to be using a rather crude one-size-fits-all logic to justify not introducing the most effective mechanism for protecting children from pornographic websites, in favour of some vague commitment to an undefined mechanism that can address everything. All this is simply not credible. In the world of online safety, there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. I am pleased, of course, that the Government want to do more to prevent children accessing pornography through social media platforms, but they should not use this as an excuse to justify jettisoning the most effective and efficacious way of protecting children from pornographic websites—statutory age verification—especially having made it a manifesto commitment I wonder whether whoever came up with this idea actually reminded the Prime Minister that they were recommending that the Conservative Party renege on a headline manifesto commitment—better, surely, to have never made that promise than to make it, introduce the legislation, prepare industry and then change their mind I also think the Government should think very carefully about how it looks to have people vote for a manifesto containing a simple, clear commitment to introduce statutory age verification and to then subsequently go back to them and say, “We know you voted for this but now we have a better idea”. In the context of Brexit, where they are saying that the political class should take care to respect how people have voted and not come back and tell them that they know better, they should apply the same logic to themselves The other consideration in all this which should not be overlooked is Britain’s influence in the world. The Government were leading the way in this space and multiple jurisdictions were watching with the greatest interest, including within the EU. If the Government recover their nerve, Britain will still have the opportunity to play a key role in setting global standards on statutory age verification. It seems bizarre that we should invest millions in developing world-leading legislation and technology and then, through an apparent loss of nerve—and with no moral compass as far as honouring manifesto commitments is concerned—turn our backs on a great opportunity for Britain to help protect children, not just in the UK but across the world. I very strongly suggest that if the Government do not want to alienate parents up and down the country, they should rapidly reconsider their strategy and lay the BBFC age verification guidance before Parliament as soon as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-lords.u85	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-22	Howe, Elspeth Rosamund Morton	U-turn on age verification policy	2019-10-22 00:00:00	2019-10-22 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords	I am grateful to the Minister. She may have got the author of Amendment 53 slightly mixed up in her thorough summing up, but at this time in the evening, and speaking as one who is looking forward to sampling a wee dram of one of our country’s best exports at the highest standards, the Minister may be forgiven There is a paradox at the heart of this issue. I mentioned the complexity of some of the trade deals that the Government seek to take forward with Mexico, Singapore and Japan. They are either in force or agreed but components of them require further discussion. That means that it is relevant, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hooper, and others have said, to bear in mind that they will be considering the future when we have asked for them to be rolled over To prove the point, we need to look at the only example that the Government have so far published: Switzerland. The Swiss themselves, although the Government have not said so, said explicitly that this agreement could serve as the basis for future economic trade relations. Interestingly—perhaps unhelpfully for the Government—they frame it as part of their “mind the gap” strategy on the basis of what they term the disorderly manner in which the UK may leave the European Union. We can rely on the Swiss to be frank and honest The paradox also exists that the rolled-over agreements will be on the basis of the existing EU regulations that the Government have committed to putting into law, which we could follow in three-year tranches under the Bill, again and again, but the Government have said that the justification for leaving the European Union is to change the way that we operate our trade policy. There is no surprise that when we are asking countries to roll over the trade agreement, but telling them at the same time that we are likely to want this agreement in place for us to have the flexibility to negotiate trade agreements based on separate regulations, they have been slightly resistant My amendment, and others in the group—I appreciate all the contributions from all the Members who have spoken—is an attempt to establish some basic principles and ethics. This is exactly the right moment to do that. Since 2010, the European Union has insisted on having sustainable development chapters in trade agreements. That has been positive for the world. It has been consistent in the contributions of colleagues who have tabled amendments that our argument is not just about concern that the UK would reduce its standards. One reason why we want to operate to the best standards is that if we are opening our markets to other countries, we do so to countries who are increasing their standards across the piece in environmental and labour law, and so on. It is an overt ambition of the Vietnam agreement that we use that clout as an economic market. That addresses the point of the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, that we should move standards up Finally, I am still scratching my head about all the Minister’s comments about how unnecessary it is to have something in the Bill because the Government have given their assurances. When it comes to workers’ rights and the environment, the Government have said time and again that we need not worry, so why did the Prime Minister say just today that she would provide Parliament with a guarantee that we would not erode protections for workers’ rights and the environment? That is our concern: that the Government can give an assurance but when it comes to putting something in legislation they pull back until they have to.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-lords.u269	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-21	Purvis, Jeremy	Trade deal complexities post-Brexit	2019-01-21 00:00:00	2019-01-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons	The potteries were founded in Burslem by Josiah Wedgwood. They are known worldwide for their world-leading ceramic tableware, which, sadly, those on the Labour Benches forgot about. As the proud Member for Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke and the chair of the all-party group for ceramics, can I ask my right hon. Friend whether he agrees that deepening our trading ties with countries that share our values, ideals and high standards is essential for growth in the UK ceramics industry?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons.u204	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-17	Gullis, Jonathan Edward	Support UK ceramics trade growth	2020-11-17 00:00:00	2020-11-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons	The answer to that question is that one cannot give a precise figure, because as we saw—[Interruption. ] I am coming to the precise issue; the number will be around 100, but one cannot give a precise figure because issues may arise such as we saw in the run-up to the March and April exit date; a correction of a previous SI might be required, or as part of the planning for exit certain issues might come to light through the Commission that necessitate an SI. So it is not possible to give a definitive number, but it will be in the region of 100.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons.u127	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-27	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Around 100 SIs anticipated	2019-06-27 00:00:00	2019-06-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-commons	I used to enjoy a hymn sandwich before this interdict, but I have broken the habit. How is my hon. Friend going to lure us back if we are not allowed to sing? May I suggest, as a minimum, shorter services, even shorter sermons, some comfortable words from the Book of Common Prayer and an end to prating prelates?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-commons.u99	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-25	Swayne, Desmond Angus	Lure us back to church	2020-06-25 00:00:00	2020-06-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-22-commons	Of course, that is absolutely the case. If my right hon. Friend is right and the meaningful vote comes to the House and is voted down, the European Council will not be able to impose, necessarily, any exit terms on this House. We would have to have some consent in this House on the way forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-22-commons.u130	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-22	Kwarteng, Kwasi Alfred Addo	House's consent needed for exit	2019-03-22 00:00:00	2019-03-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons	I thank the hon. Lady, and she is absolutely right to raise the point that she does. She will have heard that we want enhanced, greater, more immediate and more efficient testing for those high-contact groups. Over the past few months, we have seen black and minority ethnic people very, very substantially represented in trades and professions that have been very much exposed to coronavirus, and we want to make sure that we help immediately, by targeting those groups with extra testing. But I think there are more lessons to be learned for the future, and that is why we have set up the commission that we have and will be drawing further conclusions in due course.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons.u245	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-23	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Enhanced testing for at-risk groups	2020-06-23 00:00:00	2020-06-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for her passion. That passion is shared by Ministers at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and elsewhere, and conversations are ongoing about further support. Hon. Members will appreciate that, given the time constraints, I am unable to respond to many of the other specific points and questions that were raised today relating to multiple Government Departments and other bodies. However, I will make sure that relevant Ministers are aware of all the points that have been raised in this debate I cannot mention individually everyone who has contributed to today’s debate, but I thank everybody for their thoughtful and constructive comments. In particular, I would like to thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet; my hon. Friends the Members for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond), for Ynys Môn (Virginia Crosbie), for Buckingham (Greg Smith), for Hastings and Rye (Sally-Ann Hart), for Brecon and Radnorshire (Fay Jones), for Dudley South (Mike Wood) and for Bolsover (Mark Fletcher); the right hon. Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mark Tami); and the hon. Members for Newcastle upon Tyne North (Catherine McKinnell), for Bethnal Green and Bow (Rushanara Ali), for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), for Coventry North West (Taiwo Owatemi), for Luton South (Rachel Hopkins) and for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for mentioning tourism, hospitality and leisure—and, of course, aviation. Obviously, that sector is very close to my heart I would also like to thank those who have mentioned many other sectors, including my hon. Friends the Members for Broadland (Jerome Mayhew), for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher), for South Cambridgeshire (Anthony Browne), and for Kensington (Felicity Buchan), and the hon. Members for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas), for Stockport (Navendu Mishra), and for North Ayrshire and Arran (Patricia Gibson), who raised issues about the arts, technology, zoos and many other important sectors Before I conclude, I want to praise my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Darren Henry), who made a very eloquent maiden speech. He talked with passion and pride about his work, about his West Indian heritage, about this land of opportunity and about his 26 years in the RAF. That is particularly timely this week, which is Armed Forces Week. He is rightly proud of his family, and he has done his family proud. His constituency can be equally proud to have an MP of his calibre as their representative in this place It has been a great pleasure to participate in today’s debate, and I thank everybody for their contributions. This debate has been extraordinarily valuable, and I am sure that the dialogue will continue.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-commons.u387	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-25	Huddleston, Nigel Paul	Praise speech contributions and dialogue	2020-06-25 00:00:00	2020-06-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-10-commons	Like many others, it was a delight for me to spend Small Business Saturday in Stoke-on-Trent North, Kidsgrove and Talke visiting local retailers such as Goldenhill Garden Centre, Scott’s Barbers in Butt Lane, Barewall Art Gallery in Burslem, Abacus Books and Cards in Milton and the lovely Margaret Thelwell, with her vanilla custards, at Tunstall indoor market. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is important that we back our local high streets after they have made so many sacrifices to protect us and our NHS, and can we find parliamentary time to celebrate local independent retailers?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-10-commons.u285	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-10	Gullis, Jonathan Edward	Support local high streets	2020-12-10 00:00:00	2020-12-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Secretary of State was very candid in his admission that he was not consulted about Prorogation. Important decisions have to be made about Northern Ireland’s governance over this period. Can we have a clear statement, perhaps from the Prime Minister, that there will be time, either before Prorogation or at a convenient time for this House, to give the Secretary of State the power to do the things that Northern Ireland needs?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons.u271	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-05	Lloyd, Anthony Joseph	Northern Ireland governance consultation requested	2019-09-05 00:00:00	2019-09-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-lords	My Lords, accounting for the interests of future generations is a core consideration within the Government’s policy-making. The Government require that all programmes, projects and policies demonstrate the costs, benefits and risks associated with the intervention over its whole lifetime, in line with the government Green Book. This includes the impact on future generations. Where the possible effects of an intervention being examined as part of an appraisal are long term and involve very substantial or irreversible wealth transfers between generations, The Green Book sets out the analysis that is required to estimate the long-term impact of the intervention.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-lords.u3	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-01	Stedman-Scott, Deborah	Future generations considered in policy-making	2019-10-01 00:00:00	2019-10-01 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons	I congratulate the Secretary of State on hitting both the 100,000 and the 200,000 target for testing. It is indeed correct that the capacity needs to be there; we do not use the Army every day but it is important that we have it there as a resource. We have had some issues in County Durham regarding some of the drive-through testing sites. Will the Secretary of State look at that to ensure that we do not have those problems in the future?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons.u133	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-02	Holden, Richard John	Testing targets met, future issues	2020-06-02 00:00:00	2020-06-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-17-commons	The hon. Lady is right. There is no point in getting people to come forward and talk about mental health, which can be very difficult, if we do not have the services or access to them to help them, after they have made themselves vulnerable in that way. That is why I am so keen to keep our foot to the gas and ensure that we start delivering on this. We have made progress—that is undeniable—but clearly there is a long way to go, and I will come on to that I want to address the point about legislation. As someone who does a lot of work in the armed forces community and on the armed forces covenant, I know that people will say, “Why legislate? ” I have learnt in this place that we can have a number of good ideas and initiatives that we can encourage people to do but, ultimately, this is too big a challenge to be left to personalities involved in companies at different times. Sometimes we have to legislate for it. This is not a problem for the companies that already do this, but sometimes the most vulnerable people in our communities deserve the Government legislating and letting them know that we are on side.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-17-commons.u359	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-17	Mercer, John Luther	Need services for mental health	2019-01-17 00:00:00	2019-01-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-commons	I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. I just hot-footed it here from Westminster Hall, where an excellent debate on fibromyalgia took place this morning. We heard a huge amount of evidence about people who suffer with fibromyalgia having waited more than a year to be diagnosed and having received treatments irrelevant to their condition. Clearly, diagnosis is not working at the moment. What more can the Minister tell us about investment in research to improve diagnosis and to try to get better outcomes for fibromyalgia sufferers?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-commons.u47	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-15	Perkins, Matthew Toby	Improve fibromyalgia diagnosis research	2019-01-15 00:00:00	2019-01-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons	I am glad to be able to raise the issue of services at the Alexandra Hospital in Redditch in the Chamber. I hear concerns time and again in public meetings, and I thank the local groups, such as Save the Alex, that are campaigning on this matter In short, services at the Alex are inadequate. That is not my word, but the one used by the independent Care Quality Commission. It inspected Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, which includes the Alex Hospital in Redditch, in June last year and again found it to be inadequate. That represents no change since the last inspection. Indeed, in 16 areas that the CQC inspects, only one was rated good, none was outstanding, and half were rated inadequate, with the remaining requiring improvement. That is not good enough On being elected in 2017, I inherited a situation where the trust had already approved a new clinical model for future acute services to which centralisation was key. As a result, regrettably, a number of services, including maternity and paediatric care, were removed from the Alex and relocated to Worcestershire Royal Hospital. Our maternity unit closed in November 2015, and paediatrics was “temporarily” transferred in September 2016. The new plan, which was rubber-stamped in 2017, is intended to relieve pressure on both hospitals, improve patient safety and address staff shortages, but almost two years on from the removal of services and the approval of the new plan, it is clear to me that it has not had the intended outcome. The hospital is still inadequate, and the trust remains in special measures. Some services have got worse. Patients cannot access services when they need them, waiting times are poor and promised investments are not coming to fruition quickly enough. Pressure has not been relieved. Patient safety is being called into question, and staff shortages persist at both sites Since my election, I have given NHS bosses and management time to demonstrate to me and my constituents that the new clinical model is beneficial. I have done my best to explain to constituents why services were transferred, and I have visited the hospital time and again—along with my fellow Worcestershire MPs, who are here tonight—to keep a close eye on developments We have thousands of dedicated and fantastic staff in our hospital. I have spoken to many of them, and my constituents report time and again that the care they receive is fantastic. I thank every single member of staff at the hospital for their work. However, I do not believe I can continue in good faith to defend the new clinical model. It is not delivering for the people of Redditch. I secured this debate to press my constituents’ concerns on the Minister and call for a fresh approach. All options must remain on the table.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-15-commons.u368	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-15	Maclean, Rachel Helen	Alexandra Hospital services inadequate	2019-05-15 00:00:00	2019-05-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-28-lords	My Lords, we now resume Committee stage and come to the group beginning with Amendment 33. I remind noble Lords that anyone wishing to speak after the Minister should email the clerk during the debate. Anyone wishing to press this or anything else in this group to a Division should make that clear in debate Clause 8: The non-discrimination principle: indirect discrimination Amendment 33	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-28-lords.u172	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-28	Pitkeathley, Jill	Committee stage on Amendment 33	2020-10-28 00:00:00	2020-10-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-05-commons	It is right to reflect that the high street will always evolve. It will never be what it was, and it will of course be different in the future. But that does not mean that we should just give up and accept that decline is inevitable. The types of spaces that are often talked about are bespoke spaces. It might be possible to reuse a single shop front, but how it is possible to reuse a whole shopping centre that was built to be a retail core The Government’s agenda of only supporting independent traders massively underestimates the impact of anchor stores such as Debenhams or Marks & Spencer, which bring footfall through a town centre. How can it be right that companies such as Amazon can have very clever accountants to hide their profits away from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs—which cleaners in their factories would not be able to do, by the way? How can it be right that Manchester airport’s warehouse distribution centre pays half the business rates of Debenhams in Manchester city centre? Where is the fairness in that system? If the Government really want a future for town centres and high streets, they really have to address that issue The Minister for the Northern Powerhouse and Local Growth, the right hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Jake Berry), was right to thank local government, but I am afraid that it will be beyond ironic to many that these thanks came from the Minister who has lorded over austerity and who tries to ignore the fact that the last 10 years have been under a Tory Government, whether in coalition or not. I am afraid that it is not good enough for him to disown the last 10 years as if they had never happened Most councils have done a fantastic job to survive. It has been the hard work and leadership of local councillors that has meant that many areas have not just been about decline, but have been offered hope. Council officers have worked so hard to ensure that public services can be delivered. But while thanking them, maybe we should give consideration to the fact that there are more than 900,000 fewer council officers today than there were in 2010; they have been sacked and sent out the door because councils do not have the money to pay them. That is the reality on the ground When we were told that austerity was over, I do not think that anybody really expected that we would go back to 2010, but nor do I think that anybody expected the cuts to go even deeper even faster, and that is exactly what will happen under the fair funding review. I challenge the Minister—if he is so confident that that his fair funding review is well thought through and genuinely fair, and that the evidence base is robust and can be tested, what is there to hide? Why not place the data in the Library by the end of the week, so that every Member of this Parliament can hold the Government to account?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-05-commons.u259	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-05	McMahon, James	Support town centres fairness needed	2020-02-05 00:00:00	2020-02-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons	Members from across the House who have seen the assiduous nature of hon. Gentleman, particularly in Adjournment debates, will know that his constituents never get a second-class service from him. In the deal that the Prime Minister has negotiated, he has tried to operate in the same spirit that I know the hon. Gentleman does by ensuring that Northern Ireland remains part of the United Kingdom customs union and leaves whole and entire. As a consequence, the hon. Gentleman’s constituents, like mine in North East Cambridgeshire, will benefit from the great trade deals that I know the Secretary of State for International Trade intends to negotiate.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons.u193	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-19	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Prime Minister's negotiated trade deal	2019-10-19 00:00:00	2019-10-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	It was announced overnight that the Government plan to slash tariffs on the majority of products imported from outside the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Such a move would mean cheaper steel imports, with business saying that that could destroy our steel sector and our manufacturing sector more broadly. What consultation did the Government undertake with the steel sector before the announcement?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u3	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Furniss, Gillian	No consultation with steel sector	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons	It is obvious that the scale of this operation should not be underestimated. Shutting down a city the size of London as it prepares to celebrate Chinese new year is an extraordinary undertaking. What support has the international community offered to the Chinese authorities, particularly the health services, as they cope with this unprecedented strain on resources Some of my questions have already been asked, so I will just ask about the World Health Organisation, which is meeting today. What communication have the UK Government had with the WHO? Can the Secretary of State assure the House that the Government will remain updated, in real time, on developments and on what steps, if any, are required in the UK Finally, I have a number of Chinese constituents, as we probably all have, and English is difficult for many of them. When we give information to Chinese communities in the UK, is it provided in different languages?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons.u234	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-23	McLaughlin, Elizabeth Anne	Support for UK's Chinese community	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons	I thank the Minister for her responses so far. In her statement in answer to the original question, she referred to having been in touch with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the regional Administrations. Northern Ireland lags behind when it comes to tree planting. What discussions has the Minister had with the Northern Ireland Assembly to ensure that tree planting in Northern Ireland catches up with the tree planting that she mentioned in her statement and answers?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-19-commons.u14	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-19	Shannon, Richard James	Tree planting in Northern Ireland	2020-03-19 00:00:00	2020-03-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-lords	I am most grateful to my noble friend for giving way. It really seems that this is an attempt to make us unable to carry out our duty, which is to scrutinise and, if necessary, revise or pass legislation passed in the other place and that it wishes us to carry through. Is my noble friend saying that she does not wish this legislation to be taken by this House, because obviously we are facing the Prorogation timetable? If my noble friend wishes the Bill to come to us and be debated, this Motion offers the opportunity for that to happen.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-lords.u240	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-04	Altmann, Rosalind	Concern over Bill debate timing	2019-09-04 00:00:00	2019-09-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons	Last Sunday, we commemorated Holocaust Memorial Day, when we remembered the darkest period in Europe’s history. Will my right hon. Friend join me in thanking the Holocaust Educational Trust, its youth ambassadors, and the incredible survivors, who give their personal testimony to young people so that they will remember what the ultimate destination of racial hatred and antisemitism truly is?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons.u161	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-30	Blackman, Robert John	Thank Holocaust Memorial Day contributors	2019-01-30 00:00:00	2019-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-02-lords	My Lords, I will also speak to Amendments 167 and 168, which are also in my name. I am grateful to other Members for contributing to this group. The group is about another of the black holes that we are discovering in the Bill. This one is about state aid or, as we must learn to call it, subsidy—or, as the Government would have us call it, “the UK shared prosperity fund”, although details about that are incredibly difficult to find State aid matters. It particularly matters if people think money is being stolen from them and used for other purposes. The Government have quite a lot to do to try to explain where they are going with this state aid issue, the timescale and how they intend to make progress in bridging the gap between people’s expectations and where they currently are We currently get an awful lot of money through state aid; it is certainly money that would be felt if it were not there. It is hard to get a complete picture of it; the best figures that I have been able to find come from the Institute for Government, which suggests that about £20.7 billion is currently available through state aid in two main forms, the European Regional Development Fund and the European structural funds. The regional development fund focuses on physical development—physical capital, as it were—while the ESF, the structural funds, are about employment and young people and are probably best described as human capital. The combination is a significant quantum of money, held by people who I think regard it as not being money provided directly by the UK Government, although of course money technically circulates around and presumably was originally from taxation in the first place Two significant points come from that. First, the headline funding from the EU at the moment is matchable. We currently think that about 40% is added on top of the just over £10 billion—£10.6 billion, I believe—that is available directly from Europe to the UK agencies that spend it, so that gives us the figure of about £20 billion when it is matched with local authority and central government funding and from the lottery An issue that is hidden, or at least more opaque, in terms of how state aid is organised is the way in which it seems to come in response to different requirements. For instance, the long-standing convention is that there is a regional bias based on deprivation, which takes into account the broader picture across the whole of Europe. In the UK, there are only two counties currently in the most deprived areas—or most in-need areas, I think they are described as—which are west Wales and Cornwall and the Scilly Isles. However, there were recently rumours that, had we stayed in the EU, which we are not, four more might have been put into that higher-needs category. That leaves the question: will the Government continue that process? Will they also think in terms of how individual parts of the country are treated in relation to that?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-02-lords.u212	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-02	Stevenson, Robert	State aid funding confusion	2020-11-02 00:00:00	2020-11-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-14-commons	I am grateful for that intervention. I have always tried to speak about this issue in a clear voice and I have spoken for the Labour party on it. As my right hon. Friend will know, I have had many and ongoing discussions with my hon. Friends the Members for Hove and for Sedgefield about the amendment on which they have been working. Today is not about the Labour party saying that it would not support such an amendment; today is about extension and about the process.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-14-commons.u462	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-14	Starmer, Keir	Extension process focus	2019-03-14 00:00:00	2019-03-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-commons	As I said, the documents will be made available as soon as they can be. The European Council meets today and tomorrow and will have an opportunity to approve or not approve the agreement. It is a decision made by the 27 members, as the hon. Lady will know, and that decision will be made. The papers will be deposited once they are agreed. This is how things happen—it is a normal process—but I can be absolutely certain that the papers will be laid, in accordance with the Act, before the debate takes place.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-commons.u275	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-17	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Papers will be available soon	2019-10-17 00:00:00	2019-10-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons	I would be very happy to give that commitment to my hon. Friend. He will be aware of the significant allocation to capital funding that was set out by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor in the Budget, and obviously part of the discussion at the comprehensive spending round will be the allocation of that budget.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons.u51	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Commitment to capital funding allocation	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons	My right hon. Friend makes a good point. However, I believe that healthcare is different. Social care should be funded differently because everybody has a personal responsibility to provide for themselves in the future. Of course, people do not put money aside for many reasons. The system must be mandatory—that is the key—so that everybody puts some money aside even when times are tough. There is a threshold for people on low incomes, but the system means that people properly prepare for the future One of the biggest benefits comes when people are assessed as needing care. They can take the services of a charitable provider or the local authority, or decide to take the money. People who decide to take the money on a monthly basis can pay it to a relative or loved one to look after them. Another big benefit is therefore social cohesion. The system is about family looking after family, just as we used to do. We do not do that as much now. The system is good for society and for community. We saw that huge benefit when we went to Germany We have cross-party support for the idea. Both Select Committees—20-odd of us—reached that conclusion. It was one of the recommendations of our report, so we should work cross-party on it. There have been commissions on social care in the past, but when they report, the question is whether the recommendations are possible politically. If we put together our own parliamentary commission and reach cross-party consensus, I believe that we could deliver the recommendation The system has to be mandatory because there will not be an insurance market for it otherwise. That was the problem with the Dilnot recommendation. The scheme was not mandatory and therefore no insurance market developed on the back of it, so there was nothing available for social insurance. It is a great opportunity, which will cut the link between a potential huge future cost for local authorities, and our ageing population and the increased number of people with learning disabilities. Obviously, local authorities will have a huge part to play in directing services, but they will also be able to provide the other services that are critical for local people I am keen to work cross-party on the matter. I know that the Local Government Minister has regarded the proposal positively in the past and I am keen for the Department to give it a positive recommendation in the forthcoming Green Paper.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons.u372	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Hollinrake, Kevin Paul	Mandatory social care funding proposal	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	The Secretary of State’s response to my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard) was slightly disappointing. The climate assembly was made up of 108 people, from all walks of life and from throughout the country, who considered the evidence and gave their time. The report makes evidence-based recommendations on how we should reach net zero by 2050. May I push the Secretary of State to give assurances that he will consider those recommendations and not give the climate assembly participants a slap in the face? Will he also ensure that recommendations are appropriately incorporated into legislation?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u82	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Abrahams, Deborah Angela Elspeth Marie	Consider climate assembly recommendations	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons	New clause 10 says that the Government should implement the full CEDAW recommendations. The first recommendation in the CEDAW report is to repeal sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act. Does he agree that repeal would affect all of the UK, including England as well as Northern Ireland?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons.u346	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Ford, Victoria Grace	Implement full CEDAW recommendations	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords	My Lords, for those who do not know, I was the founding chairman of the Inspiration Trust, so I am fairly familiar with it. When I took on this post, I agreed with both the ethics committee in the Cabinet Office and with the Department for Education that I would have no say in any decisions made about that trust. I resigned both as a trustee and as a member and have had nothing to do with any governance decisions from the department. The noble Lord shakes his head; I am afraid he is absolutely wrong. I have had no oversight of that trust since I became a government Minister.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords.u25	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-10	Agnew, Theodore	Defending conflict of interest claim	2019-07-10 00:00:00	2019-07-10 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	The administrator is responsible for the sales process. As I mentioned earlier, there may be a number of things that the administrator and others will want to look at in the coming months, but the immediate task in hand is to find a buyer and to ensure that the Government, Invest NI and all other interested parties support that process.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u116	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Smith, Julian Richard	Administrator must find buyer	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-02-lords	My Lords, we fully support a new ceasefire—that is indeed what we are calling for. As I said, we regret that the ceasefire conversations have not brought about a sustained ceasefire, but we continue to encourage both parties to start a ceasefire On hate speech, the UK works to combat intolerance and hate globally and to promote tolerance and respect. I join my noble friend in her condemnation of hate speech.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-02-lords.u111	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-02	Sugg, Elizabeth	Support ceasefire and combat hate	2020-11-02 00:00:00	2020-11-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-commons	Clearly, it is vital that we start to build the homes that people need, in the right places. However, the release of the White Paper on planning has caused consternation about the algorithm that will drive the number of homes built in different places and some of the reforms are of concern to local people, local authorities and many across the House. Clearly, we want to get on with building new homes, which need to be in the right places. Will my right hon. Friend therefore urge the Secretary of State to come to the House to make a statement on the planned reforms, so that Members from across the House can have their say before the Government take decisions? Once those decisions are taken, I predict there will be extreme problems in terms of the legislation, unless the Government listen to what Back Benchers have to say.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-commons.u245	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-03	Blackman, Robert John	Concern over planning reforms	2020-09-03 00:00:00	2020-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	Yes, my hon. Friend makes a really good point. As I said, the south-west region is split up by the BBC, so we could get even more local. He is saying quite clearly that in the digital age we can break it down much more, almost by county or even town. That is a very interesting point.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u268	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Parish, Neil Quentin Gordon	Advocating localized digital content	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-24-commons	This has been an interesting debate, in which strong views have been expressed by 41 Back Benchers. Let us look at the UK economy. This year we have seen more people in work than ever before, with more women in work than ever before. The number of workless households is down by more than 1 million since 2010, and there are 200,000 more businesses than last year. Wages have grown at their fastest rate in 11 years and there has been the biggest ever increase in the national living wage. We are investing in the skills of the future, with more than 800,000 people participating in an apprenticeship in England in the last full academic year We have every reason to believe in our ability to succeed. We are the world’s fifth biggest economy and the ninth biggest manufacturer. We speak the world’s international business language. We have the best contract law and one of the most trusted judicial systems in the world. We have the most creative and innovative financial services sector anywhere, and three of the top 10 universities in the world. For the seventh year in a row, we have the most powerful capital city on earth But let us look at what Labour has on offer. Labour has proposed a punitive new tax every two months since Corbyn took office. Jeremy Corbyn’s party—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-24-commons.u541	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-24	Leadsom, Andrea Jacqueline	Economic progress under current government	2019-10-24 00:00:00	2019-10-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons	I rise to speak in support of the amendments tabled in my name and in those of my SNP colleagues. It is important to state from the outset that we hear regularly from across the Chamber—albeit not today, given that it is quite empty for this discussion of tax—that the UK’s tax relief system is full of inefficiencies. Our core aim with the proposed new clauses is to be constructive and get to the root of that problem in respect of entrepreneurs’ relief by asking the Government to undertake a review of the impact on investment of the changes to the relief. As I said in Committee, that can only be a positive thing. After all, there remain varying views on the effectiveness and efficacy of entrepreneurs’ relief, and whether it delivers the necessary economic objectives or whether that could be done by other means. Those varying views are clear for all to see. For example, the IFS has been quite critical of the relief, highlighting that it is poorly targeted. On the converse, the Federation of Small Businesses has emphasised the importance of the relief for the retirement of business owners I have no doubt that we will hear much from the Minister about the fact that a review has already been undertaken. It has, but that was an internal review, which is not good enough. That is of particular importance when we consider that there was much talk in the public domain of entrepreneurs’ relief being scrapped entirely at the Budget. A Back-Bench revolt ensued and that position swiftly changed, so instead of the relief being scrapped, it has gone from £10 million back to the £1 million introduced by the Labour party in 2008. I am sure that even the Minister would agree that the tail should not be wagging the dog on such important matters. What we need is clarity—clarity on effectiveness, clarity of efficacy and clarity on direction. Those points have perhaps never been as important as they are now. As we rebuild our economy following covid-19, it is more important than ever that tax incentives go to those entrepreneurs who we know will rebuild the economy That takes me on quite neatly to the further new clauses that we have tabled in respect of tax avoidance, for as we rebuild the economy, the very last thing that we need is individuals and organisations dodging what they are due. On the Scottish National party Benches, we have been clear and consistent in highlighting our profound concerns relating to Scottish limited partnerships, yet despite the obvious manner in which these can be abused, we are yet to see any real action. I sincerely hope that in his contribution, the Minister will make a commitment to end the avoidance practices of such partnerships, but I hope he can go further, too For decades, we have seen consecutive UK Governments talk the talk on ending tax avoidance, but in 2017-18, HMRC still put the tax gap at £35 billion. I have some sympathy for the Government in this regard, for just as they legislate to close one gap, another one is opened by those who wish to cheat both the system and the public, but there is scope for a comprehensive anti-avoidance rule to be introduced. The Government will point to the general anti-abuse rule introduced in 2013, but this has been heavily criticised, not least by the TUC. What we need is workable general anti-avoidance rules that tackle avoidance in all its forms, including international tax abuse, and more than ever, we need real action to combat Scottish limited partnerships I am conscious of the fact that you wish to finish before 2 o’clock, Madam Deputy Speaker, so I intend to keep my contribution brief. I will move on to my closing remarks, in which I wish to highlight that more can be done to incentivise energy efficiency through tax reliefs and, similarly, to meet the needs and demands of the Scottish economy In respect of structures and buildings, it is clear that the Government are making an attempt to amend the system to incentivise capital investment, but they can and should go further. At the risk of repeating myself once again, the easiest step they could take is to scrap VAT on building repairs. In my constituency of Aberdeen South, I have been struck by just how many homeowners, who often live in some of the most beautiful granite buildings, are unable to undertake the repairs and improvements that they either want or need due to the high costs involved. As we seek to improve energy efficiency in our homes, particularly in often old and cold buildings, surely the Government should be assessing every measure to incentivise progress, not just to help rid us of fuel poverty, but to protect both the environment and the future of our planet. Cumulative action to combat climate change is needed, and I would welcome a firm commitment from the Minister in this regard On the issue of tax reliefs, it would be remiss of me not to highlight to the Chamber the proposals put forward in recent days by my colleagues in the Scottish Government. I think that everyone—even the most ardent of UK Government supporters—was deeply underwhelmed by the plans announced by the Prime Minister to restart the economy, and that collective sigh from across the UK was entirely justifiable, because £5 billion will likely work out to be less than the cost of renovating the very building that we are in, and it is a far cry from the £80 billion of investment called for by the Scottish Government. Importantly, however, my colleagues called not just for capital investment, but for tax relief. Indeed, they were clear that reducing VAT must be an urgent act of this Government, both in terms of reducing the general rate of VAT from 20% to 15% for six months and, importantly, reducing tourism and hospitality VAT to just 5%. On top of that, a 2p cut in employers’ national insurance contributions to reduce the cost of hiring staff was also identified Unfortunately, as with all too many matters, the hands of the Scottish Government are tied on such issues. The power lies with the UK Government, a Government who Scotland neither supports nor votes for. I hope that the Minister is listening and the wider Government are listening too, because now is the time for them to introduce the tax incentives that the Scottish economy needs; to deliver the investment that the Scottish economy needs; and to provide the Scottish Parliament with the borrowing powers that it so desperately needs. If they do not, they should be ever mindful that they are only doing further damage to the very Union that they claim to support.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons.u325	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-02	Flynn, Stephen Mark	Support tax amendments review effectiveness	2020-07-02 00:00:00	2020-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-lords	My Lords, the Minister admits that England is well below where it needs to be to meet its share of the UK’s 35,000-hectare target but Scotland is not. Scotland is living up to its commitment; it is the only part of the UK doing so. My simple question is: what is Scotland doing differently and why has the rest of the UK fallen so far behind?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-lords.u39	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-03	Browne, Desmond	Scotland succeeding rest failing	2020-09-03 00:00:00	2020-09-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-lords	My Lords, how can my noble friend say that it represents value for money if she does not know the cost? To go back to the question of the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, surely that cost has to be taken as an opportunity cost compared to other forms of treatment that do not continue with people being dependent on drugs.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-lords.u11	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-28	Forsyth, Michael Bruce	Value for money uncertainty argued	2019-10-28 00:00:00	2019-10-28 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-lords	My Lords, the situation on the Irish border is desperately unclear. The EU Environment Sub-Committee concluded in July that the matter of qualifying status for Northern Ireland goods and businesses that will benefit from unfettered access to the rest of the UK market, taking into account all-island supply chains, is still unclear. What message does my noble friend have today for the agri-food producers, farmers and freight operators in Northern Ireland about what the status will be on 31 December this year?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-lords.u138	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-24	McIntosh, Anne	Irish border uncertainty persists	2020-09-24 00:00:00	2020-09-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords	My Lords, in the time available, I want to give the IFS a very big tick for the quality of its scoping study. I very much look forward to the four-year cycle coming to a conclusion In the 1970s, I was a member of the Royal Commission on the Distribution of Income and Wealth, chaired by Lord Diamond, who some people may remember from Harold Wilson’s Government. We were very keen to make sure that people understood that we needed a parallel data system for wealth, alongside that for income. Wealth is characterised by land, one of the three factors of production; the others are labour and capital. Indeed, in macroeconomic terms and in terms of Treasury public accounts, getting more from land is one way to do a lot of the things that Members here have said should be done without putting up everyone’s rates of income tax and other taxes I remind colleagues of the brilliant exposé on land ownership in Britain published in the Guardian only three or four weeks ago. Now, land creeps into the nature of our economy in a different way. A lot of companies used to borrow money from the banks for investment; now, more than 50% of banks go into land-related lending. We can see this characteristic in Britain where we are reinforcing inequality. The Guardian piece shows that little has changed over the past 1,000 years. Many members of the aristocracy and the landed gentry are descendants of the Norman barons. You had to be a friend of someone in the family of the Duke of Normandy—this was the Norman conquest—to own a lot of land in Britain, and that is true today. It is the same people. Some 17% of English land is not registered with the Land Registry while more than 50% is inherited and has never been bought or sold. Half of England is owned by less than 1% of the population. The home owners’ share adds up to just 5%, so a few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of Middle England put together. I thought that this House might be the place to put that on the record because I have not noticed any of the hereditary Peers making that point The scope of the IFS review is important in another way. It talks about trade unions and collective bargaining, and of course I declare an interest. People have to acknowledge that you need a balance in the labour market and the capital market, which can come about only if you recognise that initiatives such as workers’ representatives on remuneration committees would do a lot to change the tone of the virtue signalling in boards of directors, so that it is not just about short-term share prices. The IFS mentioned this in its synopsis. The country may be going to the dogs, but one thing which must be done to avoid that is to look carefully at the imbalance of incentives in how our economy works I turn to education. Yes, I am of the school of thought which says that if you say Eton costs £40,000 a year—I do not know whether that is right—you are investing £200,000 and you get a return on that capital. There is no doubt about that—they are not in the business of philanthropy. They are taking away other people’s playing fields. They want a return on capital to protect their difference. That is what investment in public schools is all about I am very pleased that most of these points are covered by the IFS review and I look forward to realising the ambition of the synopsis. We are not reaching any conclusions today; we are just saying that extra things can be added to it. We will see what it concludes at the end of the next four years.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords.u84	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-13	Lea, David Edward	Land disparity must be addressed	2019-06-13 00:00:00	2019-06-13 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-29-commons	I would certainly be delighted to come up to the University of Hull, which is one of the homes of one of my poetic heroes, Philip Larkin. I think also that Lord Norton of Louth still teaches politics at Hull. I would be keen, but I cannot guarantee that that would be on the same day as Huddersfield. However, going forward, if we can get the deal across the line—again, I urge Members to allow the opportunity to be able to begin future negotiations on education partnerships and on looking at both science and research when it comes to higher education—I want to ensure that we have the opportunity to provide those guarantees post 2021, although, obviously, we have made the guarantee for 2019-20. We will shortly be making announcements when it comes to the 2020-21 academic year. Going forward, that will be a matter for future negotiations with our EU partners.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-29-commons.u230	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-29	Skidmore, Christopher James	Future education partnerships post-2021	2019-04-29 00:00:00	2019-04-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-25-commons	I very much welcome the Prime Minister to his place, and welcome his commitment to making religious freedom a key priority. That being the case, given that he supported the campaign on Asia Bibi from the Back Benches, and in the light of the report of the Bishop of Truro, will cases like that now be looked at differently by the United Kingdom?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-25-commons.u494	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-25	Chishti, Atta-Ur-Rehman	Religious freedom priority question	2019-07-25 00:00:00	2019-07-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	Following the outbreak of covid among staff of Banham Poultry, in my constituency, more than three weeks ago, the company has had to shut down its plants, and slaughter or sell millions of pounds-worth of its chickens to competitors for pennies, without the compensation it would normally receive for culling in relation to animal health, incurring losses of about £2 million a week. The two family shareholders have made it clear that that is unsustainable without any signal of Government support or progress towards reopening. Given that the company received no help earlier in the year through covid interruption schemes or furloughing, because it was rightly deemed a strategic food business, and has had no compensation for culling, can my right hon. Friend give some signal today, before the company’s emergency general meeting tomorrow, that the talks with Government in the past fortnight will lead to some financial support, to avoid the loss of an historic business and local economic devastation?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u94	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Freeman, George William	Urgent financial support for Banham Poultry	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords	My Lords, I hope that one of the costs that the committee will consider in its deliberations is the cost of uncertainty. Industry longs for certainty and there is a widespread, strange view among many industrialists that leaving on 31 October at least brings certainty. They could not be more wrong. As the Governor of the Bank of England told the Commons Treasury Committee, a no-deal Brexit is, “the worst way to resolve … uncertainty” It is obvious why. By definition, a no-deal Brexit means that we will not have a trade deal when we leave, after which it will take long and difficult negotiations before we know what the most important part of our future relations with the EU will be. And let us please note: in such negotiations we will no longer be able to use what Brexiters always argue is a vital bargaining ploy—the threat of walking away—because we will be out, and in a very weak bargaining position We cannot always trust Boris Johnson’s words, as the noble Lord, Lord Adonis, has pointed out, but here is nevertheless a policy that would be very difficult to abandon. Boris Johnson says that he will not pay our divorce bill, for debts we legally owe, until we have a deal. Mr Hunt has made a rather curious suggestion that he may withhold part of the divorce payment. Leaving aside the devastating consequences of telling the world that Britain is now a country that does not pay its debts, the EU will almost certainly sue us and refuse to negotiate until we have paid. Legal proceedings, which we would almost certainly lose, will drag out for many months, probably years—so much for the early end of uncertainty It is time industry faced reality and recognised that there is no upside to a no-deal Brexit. As for most of the Conservative Party, they are now rushing like lemmings towards a no-deal Brexit, including many who have acknowledged that no deal would be a catastrophe. It brings to mind, as I wrote in a letter published in the Guardian last week, the old Greek saying: “Whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad”.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords.u83	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Taverne, Dick	No-deal Brexit increases uncertainty	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	The hon. Lady has given me an opportunity to pay tribute to the amazing work done by civil servants, and by officials in all local authorities, to prepare for leaving the European Union in all circumstances. They have done the most amazing job. She says there is no plan, but that is simply not true. There have been getting on for three years of work to prepare for all eventualities, involving thousands of civil servants who have shown their absolute commitment to taking the UK out of the EU in line with the referendum result. I will certainly not hear of anyone not pulling their weight or not doing a good job.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u363	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	Leadsom, Andrea Jacqueline	Civil servants' EU exit preparation	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons	I pay tribute to the work that councils such as Nottinghamshire have done over the past few years in making hard calls and difficult decisions as a consequence of the financial position that the Government have had to deal with. I encourage my right hon. Friend to look at core spending power, which combines all sources of local government income, because she will see that Nottinghamshire will have an additional £16.3 million between 2018-19 and 2019-20, which is an increase of 3.2%.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-05-commons.u416	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-05	Brokenshire, James Peter	Nottinghamshire funding increase acknowledgment	2019-02-05 00:00:00	2019-02-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons	I am aware that the UK Government have provided the Scottish Government with millions of pounds for Brexit preparations. In the rest of the UK, that money has gone to local authorities. Can the Secretary of State tell me how much of that funding the SNP Scottish Government have given to Moray Council or any other council in Scotland?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-commons.u44	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-27	Ross, Douglas Gordon	Funding for Scottish councils?	2019-03-27 00:00:00	2019-03-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-lords	My Lords, I very much regret the subordination of international aid to the United Kingdom’s foreign policy considerations, for all the reasons that have been given by former Prime Ministers and many others. I would like an undertaking from the Leader on poverty, girls’ education and dealing with peacekeeping on the ground, which was done by DfID previously. Why was this done ahead of the full review? We had an earlier undertaking that the reviews of the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign Office and DfID would be done together. Why, in particular, was this done early, with no contact with the staff? Staff did not know until some of us knew.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-lords.u169	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-18	Goudie, Mary Teresa	Criticizing early international aid review	2020-06-18 00:00:00	2020-06-18 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-15-commons	I beg to move, that the Bill be now read the Third time Before I talk about the Bill, I would like to associate myself with the comments from across the House about the appalling events in New Zealand, which cast a shadow over us all today. I have no words that are truly sufficient I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers) on successfully steering their equally important Bills through the House. Let’s go for the hat-trick It is over a year since I first presented the Bill to the House. Not long after, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Suffolk Coastal (Dr Coffey), and I took part in an Adjournment debate on rivers authorities. Rather a lot has happened in those 12 months, not all of it particularly good, so I am delighted that in the last five weeks the Bill has moved from struggling to putting its head above the water in the long list of private Members’ Bills and then—with, I hope, the House’s support today—into the other place.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-15-commons.u137	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-15	Warburton, David John	Third reading of Bill proposed	2019-03-15 00:00:00	2019-03-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-lords	My Lords, the first duty of any Government is the safety and security of its citizens. The Statement on defence spending is obviously welcome news. The Prime Minister’s announcement of what he called, without any sense of irony, an end to the “era of retreat” is necessary, given that the Conservatives’ last two defence reviews have led not only to spending cuts of £8 billion but to a reduction in the size of the Armed Forces by 40,000 full-time troops The enormous international uncertainty we face today reflects the diversity of the dangers we face: adversaries investing heavily in new military; the devastating effects on our health and finances of the global pandemic; economic and security uncertainty as we hurtle towards the end of the Brexit transition without knowing if, when or what the deal will be; technological developments such as AI and sophisticated internet communications that we previously only imagined; and a climate emergency—while the Government’s seeking to write into legislation the right for Ministers to break the law has done little to enhance our international standing. So, there are huge challenges However, these uncertain and dangerous times also provide an opportunity for the Government to outline a new vision of the UK’s place in the world. We have been here before: soon after the Second World War, the leadership of Clement Attlee and his Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin was instrumental in setting up NATO. Its enduring strength in providing collective security serves as a constant reminder of what the UK can achieve on the world stage. In 2002 the significance of our landmark International Development Act was recognised throughout the world, and during the 2008 financial crisis we worked globally to secure an economic rescue plan. I know I am not alone in wanting us to show such global leadership again, because when we have the vision and the moral imperative, the UK is a force for good in the world. We must ensure that our Armed Forces are properly funded and that they are integral to that vision It was almost 60 years ago that Dean Acheson, a former US Secretary of State, observed that Britain has lost an empire but failed to find a role. We ceded that issue with our membership of the EU but, as we leave, the need to define our place in the world again becomes key. This is why it is so disappointing that the Prime Minister’s Statement fails to provide the strategy to meet the many challenges we face today. For a Statement on an integrated review, it does not feel very integrated, lacking both a wider foreign policy context and clarity about the Government’s priorities. For example, other than passing references, the Statement fails to mention the security implications of climate change and how we will respond. Can the noble Baroness tell the House when the MoD’s climate change and sustainability strategy will be published Also, there is no commitment in the Statement to the Conservatives’ election manifesto pledge to maintain 0.7% GNI on aid. Following the abolition of the Department for International Development, this could have been an opportunity to restore confidence in how we see our international role. The former Prime Minister David Cameron’s statement that abandoning the 0.7% pledge would be “a moral, strategic and political mistake” was endorsed by the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Richards, a former Chief of Defence Staff, saying that this spending is hugely in the UK’s interests. The benefits that such funding has brought across the world reinforce why an integrated strategic approach is so important, and again bring home why those cuts to the budget jeopardise Britain’s soft power and influence. We have had many debates on this in your Lordships’ House and that soft power is critical to how we meet the threats faced and define our place on the international stage People need to be placed front and centre of our defence strategy, whether our brave Armed Forces personnel or those working in supporting industries. With the current jobs crisis, we welcome the commitment in the Statement to 10,000 new jobs every year. Can the noble Baroness say where these jobs will be and how they will be recruited and monitored? Will she today rule out any more personnel cuts across the Army, the RAF and the Navy? Can she also say what lessons the MoD have learned from previous overspends and mismanagement Last year, the Public Accounts Committee reported on the disastrous failure of the deal with Capita for Army recruitment. That contract has seen costs soar up to £677 million in 2018 and yet it has failed to deliver, leaving the Army understrength. The PAC also highlighted problems with other contracts and added: “We are disappointed to see the MoD replicate the contract management errors that our Committee sees all too often across government. ” Our military deserves better and increases in spending must be matched by rooting out such scandalous wastes of public money I also ask the noble Baroness about the certainty of this funding and its impact on other areas of public spending. The costs of the pandemic are eye-wateringly large. Government borrowing between April and November was £215 billion and is projected to rise further. The deficit continues to grow. The announcement that the defence budget will grow by 4.2% above inflation each year means that, by 2024-25, it will be £7 billion higher than at present, in real terms. That is a significant increase, as she is aware. With the spending review this week, there are strong indications that the Chancellor will impose a public sector pay freeze, including for military personnel and those who have been at the heart of tackling this pandemic and protecting the public. Post Covid, we need to invest to regrow our economy and protect jobs. We all know that difficult decisions will have to be taken. Can the noble Baroness, without pre-empting the Chancellor’s Statement, tell the House whether the additional costs of defence spending will be met from increased taxation or cuts in other areas of public spending In his Statement, the Prime Minister is correct to say that “our national security in 20 years’ time will depend on decisions” that he is making today. Unlike the extensive consultation in 1998, the call for evidence for this review lasted just one month. We expected to see the integrated review published this month and I understand it has now been delayed until next year. I do not know if the noble Baroness is able to explain the reasons for the delay, but I hope that she will tell your Lordships’ House that the delay will allow for engagement and consultation with all involved. Doing so will have an impact on the likely success of such an integrated review and strategy. We need an ambitious strategy to develop new international relationships and protect our country against serious threats in the years ahead. Defence spending is essential to this, but the Government still need to address the strategy and identify the diverse threats to peace and stability. Doing so requires a coherent, co-ordinated plan with, at its core, a vision of the UK as a moral force for good.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-lords.u116	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-23	Smith, Angela	Defence strategy lacks broader vision	2020-11-23 00:00:00	2020-11-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. I, too, have read the statement from the ABI. This is a major issue which has rightly received extensive and negative attention in the media. These businesses are in limbo and are threatened with ruin as a result of being unable to invoke the terms of their business interruption insurance policies. Will the Government now reconsider their policy and direct closure, as has been the case in so many continental countries? It is much more likely—although not certain, as the ABI statement makes clear—that claims will be successful in those circumstances. The other alternative is for the Government to put their own scheme in place where insurance is not available. It is incumbent on the Government to show that they understand what business is facing.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords.u66	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Clement-Jones, Timothy Francis	Government must support businesses urgently	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-lords	My Lords, the UK supports the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Azerbaijan while underlining the importance of the UN and OSCE principles that govern relations between member states. We also support the OSCE Minsk Group process and the basic principle that sits beneath it, which includes a return of the occupied territories and the acceptance of a free expression of will on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. A meeting was held yesterday of the Security Council, where our representative expressed concern about the reports of large-scale military actions and underlined our full support for the central role of the Minsk Group co-chairs. We continue to engage diplomatically in the UK with the Minister for the European Neighbourhood, and in both countries.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-30-lords.u82	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-30	Sugg, Elizabeth	UK supports Azerbaijan Minsk process	2020-09-30 00:00:00	2020-09-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons	My hon. Friend mentioned that briefly to me already, so I know that it is on his radar. It is important that all our roads are managed by the appropriate authority in the interests of road users and local communities, and I would be quite happy to meet my hon. Friend and the roads Minister.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-12-commons.u123	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-12	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Meeting about road management	2020-03-12 00:00:00	2020-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons	In opening, let me send my heartfelt condolences to all those who have lost family members at this difficult time. The complications of isolation make bereavement more challenging, and I pray that all can find peace, as they work through their pain of loss Again and again, we are struck by the professionalism, care, compassion, courage, commitment and love of our NHS and care staff. They have gone beyond their duty to serve us, as have so many frontline workers, ensuring that the nation is fed, supported and cared for. I know, in York, of the sacrifices that have been made by so many and thank all workers and volunteers for each act of kindness that they have shown during this crisis I want to raise one issue on the behalf of those workers before moving to my main contribution. In November 2014, following the Francis report into the serious issues uncovered at Mid Staffordshire hospital, the duty of candour was introduced. If healthcare workers are to be safe, we need to ensure that there is a place where all can safely raise concerns, and that those concerns are responded to. The duty should extend to all. I know that concerns have been raised by careworkers in my constituency and yet they have not been addressed. Access to PPE is one such example. Employers, local resilience forums and, yes, Government need to be honest in their response to the challenges that are presented, and mitigation must be put in place to protect workers Last night, the nation was thrown into confusion, but I believe the Prime Minister was clear: he was shifting risk from the state to individuals and businesses. That is unacceptable when dealing with such a dangerous virus. Today, I want to raise two major issues missing from the Government’s strategy. To mitigate the worst aspects of the pandemic, we need better data and we need a risk analysis. The data is scant and the risk analysis absent. As covid-19 will be prevalent until a vaccine is administered, the right data needs collecting now I have two brief examples. We receive hospital mortality figures and, latterly, figures for care homes. However, if we are looking into infection control, it is not the location of death that is important, but the location of infection. How many covid-positive hospital admissions originate from care homes, how many have been infected in hospitals, and then how have many died? Clearly, infection data, not just mortality data, must be shared. We need data to expose where risk resides. How do the infections and deaths of so many people align with protected characteristics and underlying health conditions? If they do align, with which ones, and what about socioeconomic circumstances? Data needs to be granulated, so that risk is understood and mitigated Secondly, where is the risk register? Today, I am calling on the Government to publish a risk register. Unless there is a full risk analysis of all the risks, how can we balance them and put appropriate mitigation in place? Without a risk register, how can anyone scientifically scrutinise the Government? Every Department, every local authority, every statutory body and every employer must produce a risk analysis not only on the basis of health but, importantly, on the basis of the economy. Each decision must also be accompanied by an equality impact assessment. Had that been the Government’s approach, we would never have seen the austerity measures that stripped our NHS of vital resources such as PPE and staff, and all the gross inequalities demonstrated in the mortality statistics. We would not have seen the mistakes that have occurred over the past few weeks, with gaps in the economic package causing severe hardship. We would not have had last night’s announcement. We need an evidence-based approach to decision making, and we need this crucial information published now. I call on the Government to put data and a risk analysis in the public domain.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons.u295	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-11	Maskell, Rachael Helen	Improve pandemic response with data	2020-05-11 00:00:00	2020-05-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords	I must confess to feeling that perhaps I am not the best person to lead off this segment of the debate, because my amendment seeks to change subsection (8) of the clause but the group as a whole will take into account a wider range of issues relating to the definition of “national benefit”. I look forward to hearing the many views that will be expressed around the amendments in this group My amendment simply seeks to make the point—I fear this is a return to the discussion at the start of the debate—of what it is that we are doing in the handing out of a fishing quota, which is held in public trust, for private benefit. I therefore seek to amend the description of the national benefit objective as set out in the Bill from a fairly narrow definition that “fishing activities of UK fishing boats bring social or economic benefits to the United Kingdom”, and suggest that it should be reworded that the national benefit objective is that “the public exploitation of the fishery for commercial, recreational and environmental purposes brings benefit to the United Kingdom” So the amendment seeks to make it clear in the Bill that it is more than simply the fishing activity for which we are granting quotas that constitutes a national benefit I know that noble Lords will speak to other amendments around the principle of the UK benefiting from the granting of quotas, but my amendment seeks to probe why it is that we are defining national benefits so narrowly and restricting it to fishing activities and fishing boats. The phrase seems a little odd, given that, as we have discussed, the founding principle of the Bill is that we have a national asset in our fishing resource that is held in trust for the public and granted out to fishing activity. I feel that the national benefit has been too narrowly drawn and too narrowly attached to fishing activities and fishing boats That is the purpose of the amendment. As I say, the rest of the amendments in the group seek to consider and assess different aspects of the national benefit—but I beg to move my amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords.u250	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-02	Worthington, Bryony	"Amendment broadens ""national benefit"" definition"	2020-03-02 00:00:00	2020-03-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons	The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent broader point. Moving towards electrification is vital as part of our reaction to climate change and achieving net zero, but it needs to be done safely. The safety of the products that we buy online and in shops, and ensuring that those products can be recalled and replaced when there are safety issues, is key.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons.u304	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-21	Ford, Victoria Grace	Safe electrification for climate action	2020-01-21 00:00:00	2020-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-lords	My Lords, do not take down statues; take down racism. These were the words of Sir Geoff Palmer, Scotland’s first black professor and currently emeritus professor of life sciences at Heriot-Watt University. I agree with these sentiments and believe that the statues should remain, but they should have a clear description attached detailing the contributions made by the subjects and how they achieved their wealth and status. When I worked as a young surgeon in Ghana in the 1970s, I was struck by a bust of Queen Victoria on a pedestal in Victoria Park in Cape Coast—the very place where slaves left to go to America. Ghanaians may have many reasons for wanting to remove the bust of Queen Victoria—a queen who represented Britain at the height of its imperial power. That statue remains because it is part of Ghana’s history. We should leave the statues where they are but explain why they are there. Will my noble friend undertake to do this?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-lords.u99	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-15	Ribeiro, Bernard Francisco	Keep statues, contextualize with plaques	2020-06-15 00:00:00	2020-06-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons	I was the Minister responsible for taking the Mesothelioma Act through Parliament and, despite the restrictions I was under, Paul was an enormously useful knowledge base. At times I went back to my civil servants and said, “No, I have facts from people who were involved in this. ” That was very useful, and the House should recognise the work of Paul Goggins.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons.u192	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-06	Penning, Michael	Paul Goggins' valuable contribution acknowledged	2019-02-06 00:00:00	2019-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-commons	Commonwealth War Graves Commission staff have been forced to decide by today, with only three weeks’ notice, where they will work and live in the new year. That is terrible treatment, as usually they have a minimum of three months, and support from the commission. Will the Secretary of State intervene to ensure that the commission upholds its values by stopping this action, holding a meaningful review of the situation, and allowing unions to negotiate with it?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-commons.u131	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-07	Hopkins, Rachel Louise	CWGC staff relocation concerns raised	2020-12-07 00:00:00	2020-12-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons	I will later today present our finance settlement, which the hon. Lady can vote for if she really thinks that there is not more money going to local authorities. There will be a 4.4% real-terms rise, a £1 billion social care grant, and a further £500 million that can be accessed, and the rise in council tax will be the lowest since 2016.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons.u83	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-24	Hall, Luke Anthony	Finance settlement details shared	2020-02-24 00:00:00	2020-02-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons	T2. Since the 2007 Corston review into women in the criminal justice system, more than 100 women have died in our prisons. Inquest has recently published an update to its report, “Still Dying on the Inside”, which details both the tragic and often unavoidable circumstances surrounding deaths of women in custody. What concrete action have the Government taken to resolve this crisis?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons.u122	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-25	Stevens, Joanna Meriel	Women dying in prisons crisis	2020-02-25 00:00:00	2020-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-21-lords	My Lords, as seemingly the first who got through the virus, I add to the tributes to Lord Gordon of Strathblane. I was so sad to hear of his death, which is a terrible reminder of the threat of this disease I note that the Commons will be hybrid and we will be virtual—two different systems. I hope we will shortly adopt the same system. I also note the opportunity of this terrible circumstance. For example, I have had the privilege of joining meetings across the world that I have not had before and in a way that did not occur before. That is a huge benefit. There are new ways of working that I hope we will learn from in this circumstance.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-21-lords.u8	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-21	Granshaw, Lindsay	Tribute, hybrid system, new opportunities	2020-04-21 00:00:00	2020-04-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-17-commons	Although there is no evidence that cost is behind the tragic cases that we have heard about, will the Secretary of State look in his root-and-branch review at the price that the hospital is paying for food? Spending £1 per meal is not enough for a healthy, nutritious meal for patients. Some trusts are spending less than £5 a day on a patient’s food. Will he also look at legislating for safe staffing levels, so that there are enough nurses on wards to feed patients? About a third of patients are eating less than half the food that is served to them and are suffering from malnutrition. Will he look at both those issues to improve patient safety?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-17-commons.u243	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-17	Caulfield, Maria Colette	Improve hospital food and staffing	2019-06-17 00:00:00	2019-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons	I suggest that it does this House a disservice if people outside see us haggling over which country has had fewer deaths—frankly, I think it does Members on both sides of the House a disservice—so I would like to go back to the hon. Gentleman’s comment on the summer statement last week. He spoke about how the UK Government’s funding had bypassed Scotland. That is an untrue statement. What it did was bypass the Scottish Government, and once again, that shows that unless the money has the stamp of the Scottish Government on it, the SNP does not accept that money being spent here can benefit the people and businesses of Scotland.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-commons.u246	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Bowie, Andrew Campbell	Haggling over deaths disservices House	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	My Lords, I intend to speak to Amendment 10 in my name. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Marks, and the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, for their remarks and questions. I agree with my noble friend Lord Foulkes—he of the suspicious mind. Do not worry, I will not break into song The amendment seeks to retain the current arrangements. It proposes a new clause to put the Government’s stated negotiating objective of remaining part of the EHIC scheme in the Bill. The reason for that is quite simple: 27 million of our citizens have EHICs, which cover pre-existing medical conditions as well as emergency care. Individuals with chronic illnesses, for example those who require daily dialysis, can travel knowing that they will receive treatment on the same terms as the citizens of the country they are visiting or residing in. The Government have said that they want both UK and EU citizens to be able to continue using the EHIC scheme after Brexit. The amendment would put that beyond doubt Indeed, it reflects the 47th report of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, which, as the Minister will be aware, has batted back to the Government and reaffirmed its view of the Bill. The report states: “It is a skeleton Bill allowing the Secretary of State by regulations … to make provision in relation to the exercise of the power to make payments in respect of the cost of all forms of individual healthcare provided by anyone anywhere in the world … to make provision for and in connection with the provision of any such healthcare … and … to give effect to healthcare agreements” It goes on to say: “We are concerned that the Brexit process has given rise to a series of Bills, of which this is the latest, containing unprecedented powers for Ministers to make law by statutory instrument” Neither the Minister nor her supporters have addressed why that is necessary and dangerous. They have not acknowledged the issue that this House is very concerned about I will mention two more things. In a recent briefing, the Association of British Insurers said that it is supportive of proposed amendments that would encourage detailed agreement with the EU to be sought in order to provide certainty for travellers with long-term medical conditions and reciprocal arrangements for pensioners in the UK and EU. Talking about the retention of current reciprocal arrangements, the BMA said in a recent briefing that it believes that, “the UK Government should undertake every effort to retain the current model of reciprocal healthcare with the EU rather than seeking alternative mechanisms” I will end there but that is why we have tabled this amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u149	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Thornton, Dorothea Glenys	Retain EHIC healthcare post-Brexit	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-lords	My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Warwick, and I add my congratulations to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, on securing a debate on such an important topic. I am legally qualified; however, I have spent my career in international business, which has included spells in New York, Zurich and Bermuda, as well as 20 years or so in the City itself. Underpinning all international business are written agreements, which all have provisions to determine the governing law and jurisdiction arrangements concerned in whatever that agreement is. The winner by choice in so many of these things—I do not mean just with UK entities as parties, but generally—is English law and English jurisdictional methods, which may include arbitration or mediation as well. This leadership positioning of English law is a key component, I submit, of the great success of the City of London and the huge legal businesses there now: the magic circle firms are world leading and exceptionally large In preparing for this debate, I rang up an Austrian lawyer who I knew used English law in some of his arrangements. I asked him why he did that and he said, “It is the prestige”. When I tried to analyse with him what he meant, he said, “The first thing is that you have a structure—a structure which is presidential, predictable and fair. The second thing you have is the people, in that the quality of the judiciary is exceptionally high and they understand what you’re talking about, because they have the knowledge and experience of arcane financial services instruments or other things as well”. He also pointed out, and I agree, that those things are comprehensively intertwined. I therefore feel strongly that any damage to this happy leadership position is greatly against the national interest. A business principle that I have always abided by is “Everything communicates”. If your brand is trying to be a premium brand, you cannot send out a letter to all your clients full of spelling mistakes. If you were Gerald Ratner, you would understand this point as well because he criticised his own brand and his business simply disappeared. We have our own principles of comity, which are incredibly important as the boundaries between Parliament and the court. They were clearly laid out in principle—or relaid—by our Lord Speaker in his Written Statement of October last year. Although I agree with the noble and learned Lord, Lord Brown, that they could do with some strengthening, they are clearly laid out procedurally as well in our Companion to the Standing Orders. If we ignore those things, we therefore communicate something negative about our precious legal system I am not suggesting that this is a death-by-one-cut thing at all, as in the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Empey. But if we serially ignore our courts—ignore the hard work of the Court of Appeal, which heard for several days on this matter—we will find other jurisdictions snapping at our heels. Other governing law matters will come and people will choose them, which would be damaging to us. We will find it damaging to our efforts, which have already been damaged recently by such things as pension arrangements, to recruit really good judges. So “Everything communicates” is why this debate is important, because I hope we are communicating that we thoroughly support our judges and that we have a method of comity, set out in the Statement of our Lord Speaker and in our Companion. We should stick to that method.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-lords.u78	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Hay, Charles	Support for English legal system	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons	Yes—my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State reassures me that we will absolutely keep a watching brief. The early signs are that the new protocol is having a beneficial effect The hon. Member for Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter) raised a query about what will happen to the site. He should be aware that a commission has now been constituted. I gather that it has met a number of times, and it is very much being led by the bereaved, the survivors and the community themselves so that they are in the driving seat about what should happen on the site and what kind of memorial they wish to have. I am sure we can provide the hon. Gentleman with more information on that if he wishes Some Members raised issues around electrical safety compliance. Obviously progress has been made as far on the duty of landlords, in both the private and the social sector, to ensure compliance, particularly where small electrical goods are concerned. I am informed that the Consumers Minister—my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Strood (Kelly Tolhurst)—has commissioned the Office for Product Safety and Standards to develop options for increasing the rate of product registrations, including potential mandatory registration. A number of workstreams are under way looking to understand the barriers to registration and consumers’ attitudes to that registration, which will inform this work in the future The hon. Member for Westminster North (Ms Buck) and my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Nickie Aiken)—I know her area well from my time as a councillor and as a London Assembly member—raised the issue of sprinklers and the complexity of tenure that may stand in the way of the retrofitting of sprinklers in older blocks across the city. That is obviously a difficult and complex area of legality, not least because one would have to cross the barrier of possibly fitting sprinklers against the will of a property owner where they are in a collective block and therefore have collective safety, but I know colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government will be dealing with the issue Finally, in her excellent speech, following on from her equally brilliant maiden speech in which she raised this subject, my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington (Felicity Buchan) mentioned a couple of issues. First, she said that she had met the new commissioner of the LFB, whom I have also met recently. He impressed me with his ambition and his willingness to embrace the issues for the London Fire Brigade that have been raised both by the inspectorate and by the inquiry. He does seem committed to real change in that organisation, which was very encouraging to see Along with the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), my hon. Friend raised the issue of a member of the inquiry panel. The Home Office is obviously a core participant in the inquiry, so it would not be right for me to comment either way, but I can reassure both of them that the Cabinet Office is aware of this issue and is giving it some thought There is nothing that we can do to turn back the clock on this tragedy, and there are no words of condolence or sympathy that will bring back those who lost their lives or offer comfort to those whose lives have been irrevocably changed by this tragedy. All we can do is learn the lessons of this terrible event and work tirelessly to ensure that a disaster on this scale can never happen again It is incumbent on all of us—the Government, the emergency services, those responsible for managing high rise residential buildings and the construction industry—to work together to bring real change. I am confident that the inquiry’s detailed analysis of the evidence seen in phase 1 will continue to phase 2, and that the panel will uncover the full truth of what happened on that terrible, dark night Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 1 Report.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons.u317	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-21	Malthouse, Christopher Laurie	Grenfell Tower safety, inquiry progress	2020-01-21 00:00:00	2020-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-20-lords	My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Altmann, and the noble Lords, Lord Carlile and Lord Stevenson, for supporting this amendment, which limits the disapplication of the Consumer Credit Act in Clause 12 to being only in so far as it relates to affordability There is no disagreement over disapplying affordability criteria, given that the Government have asked banks to speed up loans and dispense with the usual due diligence on affordability. However, we can see no reason for disapplication for unfair treatment, such as in default measures, which have been at the centre of more than one SME banking scandal. This is not an unreasonable amendment, because disapplication for affordability is exactly the same measure that has been introduced throughout the Lending Standards Board’s voluntary lending code. Why do the Government have to go further in disapplying remedies for all unfair treatment under this Bill rather than limiting it to affordability Apart from for micro-businesses, there is no regulatory protection for business loans or recovery procedures other than the measure the Government now seek to disapply. This was excruciatingly elaborated in the Financial Conduct Authority’s report on RBS’s Global Restructuring Group, which said that the FCA had no regulatory power. It also said that it was unlikely the behaviour would have been caught by the senior managers regime, had that applied. Andrew Bailey has since spoken before committees in Parliament and at many other meetings, explaining how business lending and debt recovery are outside the regulatory perimeter In Committee, the Minister said that “the Government have retained Financial Conduct Authority oversight for debt collection, meaning that lenders must comply with the Financial Conduct Authority rules on arrears, default and recovery. ” —[Official Report, 13/7/20; col. 1516. ] Those rules are only for loans up to £25,000 made to sole traders, unincorporated associations and partnerships of fewer than four people—that is, micro-businesses. The Bill deals with removing protection from loans up to £50,000, which is by far the majority of bounce-back loans, given that the average loan is £37,000. Why, when there is more restrained disapplication for micro-businesses, and in the voluntary code, are the Government so resistant to a similar compromise in the Bill? Why are the Government depriving most bounce-back borrowers of the courts’ protection, at least for debt recovery?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-20-lords.u207	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-20	Bowles, Sharon	Limit disapplication of Consumer Credit Act	2020-07-20 00:00:00	2020-07-20 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords	My Lords, the hybrid sitting of the House will now resume. Some Members are here in the Chamber, respecting social distancing, others are participating virtually, but all Members are treated equally. If the capacity of the Chamber is exceeded, I will immediately adjourn the House We now come to the Motion in the name of the Senior Deputy Speaker. The Procedure Committee agreed that this type of business should be conducted as physical proceedings only, with no opportunity to participate virtually other than by the mover, in this case the Senior Deputy Speaker. There is no speakers’ list, but Members present in the Chamber are entitled to participate. However, the Procedure Committee guidance requests any Member intending to speak on such Motions to give notice in advance.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords.u90	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-07	Fowler, Peter	Proceedings update and participation rules	2020-09-07 00:00:00	2020-09-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-lords	My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the Government’s policy is to relax quarantine rules for elite sports so that soccer clubs can compete in European competitions, Formula 1’s plans for Silverstone can go ahead, and French horses entered for the Derby in three weeks’ time can do so, with appropriate safeguards but without a strict fortnight’s quarantine?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-lords.u117	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-10	Moynihan, Colin	Relax quarantine for elite sports	2020-06-10 00:00:00	2020-06-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-07-commons	I very much welcome the Minister’s and the UK Government’s recognition of Juan Guaidó as the interim President of Venezuela. I think that the response by the shadow Minister was frankly astonishing in almost seeking to absolve the Maduro regime of the responsibility that it should have for this crisis in the country that is causing misery to millions Will the Minister tell the House a little more about how further sanctions might be invoked, both in making sure that they are so finely targeted as not to have a negative impact on the people who are already suffering, and in using them to put pressure on individuals, particularly senior members of the military, to stop their backing for the corrupt and illegitimate Maduro regime, as that is what is enabling it to maintain its stranglehold on the country?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-07-commons.u374	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-07	Swinson, Joanne Kate	Support for Guaidó and sanctions	2019-02-07 00:00:00	2019-02-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-commons	I am very grateful to the putative Prime Minister—I say to him that he could not possibly do a worse job than what we have seen in the past few years. Has the right hon. Gentleman paid attention to the petition that has now been signed by 5.5 million people right across the UK, including over 10% of his constituency? Would he now concur that revocation—just ending this madness once and for all—remains a real-life possibility for this country?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-commons.u384	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-25	Wishart, Peter	Petition to revoke UK's situation	2019-03-25 00:00:00	2019-03-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons	I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention and the constructive way in which it was put. I will give him an undertaking to raise that point with the independent adviser and ask for a response to it New clause 8 seeks to allow claimants to appeal to the first-tier tribunal against determinations made under the scheme. As I have outlined, we have already established an independent review process for those dissatisfied with their compensation offer. The first stage is an internal Home Office review by someone who has not been involved previously in the individual’s case, but if the claimant remains dissatisfied, they can request a review by the Adjudicator’s Office, which is a non-departmental public body that is completely independent from the Home Office Moving on to the two amendments tabled by the official Opposition, amendment 4 seeks to formally define the Windrush compensation scheme as open to individuals from beyond the Caribbean Commonwealth. I appreciate the thought behind the amendment, but it is not necessary. The criteria for the scheme do not just apply to individuals from the countries of the Caribbean Commonwealth. I accept that there may a need to promote that point a bit more, but, to be clear, that restriction is not there.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons.u407	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Foster, Kevin John	Compensation appeal process detailed independent	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-lords	My Lords, how do you summarise that lot? I thought I would group them today, but you cannot group these speeches—they are too individual, and of course they reflect the individuals who made them. It has been a privilege to sit here and listen to some of the really erudite and sometimes quite passionate things that people have said The noble Baroness, Lady Williams of Trafford, started off by talking about the £5 million given for events last year. I ask her: what about this year? Can the Government perhaps find another £5 million down the back of the sofa? I hope we may be able to do something like that again this year The noble Baroness, Lady Gale, talked about the voting system in Wales being the best in the UK. Of course, it is not the first past the post system, which works against so many different minority groups in this country. If it were the additional member system and we got fair votes, we could have a more representative and wider democracy.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-lords.u190	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-07	Burt, Lorely	Erudite speeches funding voting system	2019-03-07 00:00:00	2019-03-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons	I have a lot of sympathy with that view. If we look back over the last few months, whenever we have reduced restrictions, that has worked—it can work—but the problem we have is that, combined with the euphoria over the vaccine, we have the situation where people are not just going to mix with three other households, but may also bend the rules a bit around that, so we will end up right at the limit. R is just below 1: there is no headroom left. I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman is saying and I understand it, but my fear is that it is just not going to work that way.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons.u357	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-14	Moran, Layla Michelle	Concerns over relaxing restrictions	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons	I congratulate my hon. Friend on his election as Chair of the Select Committee. Yes, I agree with him about working with schools. One point that is often forgotten is that local authorities already have the power to reduce speed limits, for example to 20 mph. I look forward to working with him as Chair of the Committee.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-commons.u8	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Shapps, Grant	Congratulations new Chair collaboration	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons	Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise for not being in the Chamber earlier; I was watching on the television screens and heard what you said about the need to consider this matter carefully. I only became aware of it when I popped into the Table Office and saw that something had been thrown down by the Government, in a quite odd move. If the Government were in effect trying to put the same question again, is it not the case that they would be trying to avoid tabling the withdrawal Bill, which the Prime Minister indicated he would do? Of course, many Members of this House from all parts and with all views on Brexit wish to see that Bill so that they can adequately consider it, appropriate impact assessments can be undertaken, Committees such as the Exiting the European Union Committee, chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), can consider it, and amendments to it can be tabled. Does it not strike you, Mr Speaker, that this is an odd way to be proceeding, given the clear will of the House expressed today on a very clear question?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons.u445	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-19	Doughty, Stephen John	Government's odd maneuver on Bill	2019-10-19 00:00:00	2019-10-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons	The hon. Member has heard my response on that. It is in the manifesto, and we will deliver on our manifesto commitments The first chapter of the Bill provides the framework for funding schemes to support farmers, foresters and land managers. Clauses 1 to 3, which contain the meat of the Bill, will empower the Government to devote public money towards securing the public goods that people value so much, but which the market does not fully recognise or reward.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons.u372	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-03	Villiers, Theresa Anne	Funding framework for public goods	2020-02-03 00:00:00	2020-02-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	My hon. Friend is a huge champion for his farmers. What we have seen in British agriculture is increasing success in exports. We are now a net exporter of dairy products for the first time in recent years. We are getting increasingly large exports of all kinds of meat products, dairy products, and finished food and drink products. He can be assured that when we are negotiating the specific market access schedules in CPTPP, we will always be looking out for British farmers, making sure that they are getting the benefit of the deal.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u262	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Truss, Elizabeth Mary	Support for British farmers' exports	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons	During the election campaign, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor visited Bolton Lads and Girls Club, which is a real hub for inspiring our children. Does the Chancellor agree that the uplift in funding for schoolchildren right across Bolton North East will ensure that our young people fulfil their true potential?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-commons.u4	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-07	Logan, Mark Rory	Funding boost for Bolton students	2020-01-07 00:00:00	2020-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-lords	My Lords, one reason why I think your Lordships believe we need to see the legal text concerns the arrangements that are being proposed for democratic consent in Northern Ireland. As I understand the arrangements under the Good Friday agreement, a majority in both communities have to agree to any major change. Why is it that this is being briefed as giving the DUP a veto? Why should not Sinn Féin also have a veto on any change that might introduce a hard border in the island of Ireland?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-07-lords.u132	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-07	Liddle, Roger John	Northern Ireland consent arrangements questioned	2019-10-07 00:00:00	2019-10-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons	As I mentioned in an answer a few moments ago, we have already put billions of pounds into supporting this sector. The hon. Lady may be pleased to hear that there is something she can do, and that is to ask the Scottish Government to join with us to ensure that we can have air bridges in place nationwide as quickly as possible.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons.u145	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-02	Shapps, Grant	Support air bridges nationwide	2020-07-02 00:00:00	2020-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons	I think I can give the hon. Lady an encouraging message to take back to the pupils of St Gregory’s school, which is that, under the leadership of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, the Government have launched a resources and waste strategy, which includes consulting on plans to introduce consistent recycling for all households, consulting on a deposit return scheme to drive up the recycling of cans and bottles and plans for producers to pay the full cost of managing packaging waste for extended producer responsibility. I think that that makes a good package.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-05-commons.u144	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-05	Lidington, David Roy	Government's encouraging recycling strategy	2019-06-05 00:00:00	2019-06-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-16-commons	The Minister rightly began by talking about victims—those who were killed, those who were killed unlawfully—and the families of those victims, who all these years on still seek truth and to know what has happened to their loved ones. As a matter of record, which I know the Minister will confirm, the overwhelming majority of the killings that took place in Northern Ireland were committed by paramilitaries, republican or loyalist—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-16-commons.u170	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-16	Lloyd, Anthony Joseph	Victims' justice and paramilitary violence	2019-05-16 00:00:00	2019-05-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-11-commons	I will support the withdrawal agreement in the vote next Tuesday. In making that decision, I have kept one thing and one thing only uppermost in my mind: how do I best represent the people of North Devon and what is in our best interests? I am thinking only of the people of North Devon and what they put me here to do. They put me here to deliver Brexit. The 2016 referendum result in North Devon was clear: 58% voted leave. In the general election of 2017, I stood on a manifesto that committed to delivering Brexit. The result was clear, and deliver it I will I believe that the withdrawal agreement, while not perfect by any means, fulfils those pledges. It is not perfect; it is a compromise. There is some stuff in it that I do not like and there is probably some stuff in it that the EU27 do not like, but that is what a compromise is. I believe that the agreement fundamentally does deliver on Brexit. It gives us control over our borders, our money, our laws and our security. It does enough, in my view, to deliver Brexit, while avoiding the risks inherent in leaving without an agreement. We must avoid doing that Some say, mostly colleagues from across the House who are strong leave supporters, that the withdrawal agreement does not represent the Brexit they voted for and that they would therefore like me to vote against it. I am sorry, but I am not prepared to take that risk. It is simply too great. People will disagree and say, “It’ll all be fine. Of course we can leave without a deal. Of course there won’t be shortages of food and medicines. Of course there won’t be a hard border in Ireland, with all the potential consequences that brings. Of course we’ll be able to trade with the rest of the world in some tariff-free, sunlit upland. ” I say to those people, “You might be right, but you might be wrong, and that is not a risk I am prepared to take. ” I want to be clear that I respect those who hold other views. I was much taken with the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for Mid Sussex (Sir Nicholas Soames), who said we need to be moderate in our language and that, if we disagree, we must do so respectfully. There is one thing I do disagree with, and that is the call for a second referendum or people’s vote. The time limit does not allow me to go into all the reasons why; they run to a page and a half of my speech. Quite simply, there is one thing to say: the real motivation of those who ask for a second referendum is to reverse the result of the first, and that is something up with which we will not put I want to say a word about a very important sector of the community and economy of North Devon—agriculture. Farmers are understandably concerned. I want the Government to do more, particularly with the Agriculture Bill. I have met the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on many occasions. Yesterday, there was a significant development when a group of farmers unions issued a very clear statement warning strongly against the risk of a no-deal Brexit and in favour of the Prime Minister’s withdrawal agreement. They have got this right I have come to a conclusion that I believe, in my judgment, is the best one for North Devon and the UK. I believe that this withdrawal agreement is just that. Whatever conclusion I come to, a large number of people in my constituency will disagree. It is simply impossible for me or anyone else in this House to please everyone, and it is impossible to reach a decision with which everyone will concur. However, it is my job to reach a judgment that I think is in the best interests of most people, and it is my judgment that there is one thing that most people agree with now, which is that we now just need to get on with it. Businesses, farmers and EU citizens living, working and providing such a valuable input to our economy here, as well as UK citizens living, working or retired in the EU, want certainty. They want to get on with it; I want to get on with it; my constituents in North Devon want to get on with it. This House should get on with it and support this withdrawal agreement.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-11-commons.u120	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-11	Heaton-Jones, Peter	Supporting Brexit withdrawal agreement	2019-01-11 00:00:00	2019-01-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons	I hope Ministers have had a look at Policy Exchange’s paper titled, for better or worse, “Extremism Rebellion”. Although we may defend people’s right to hold views about green anarchism, eco-socialism and radical anti-capitalist environmentalism, I want to make sure that there is no tacit approval from either Dispatch Box for what the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott) called “disruption”—I would say it is a deliberate policy of disruption. Will the Minister reassure me that the Government know what they are dealing with?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons.u157	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-22	Baker, Steven John	Addressing policy on eco-extremism	2020-01-22 00:00:00	2020-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	The hon. Gentleman, as ever, raises a very important point. The events that he describes are extremely distressing to hear. We are deeply concerned to hear about the scale and severity of violations, not just in the example that he gives but in other places around the world. I know that the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief will be overseeing the implementation of the recommendations from the Bishop of Truro and will be making sure that all Ministers are aware of them.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u180	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Andrew, Stuart James	Human rights violations globally recognized	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons	First, may I draw your attention, Mr Deputy Speaker, and that of all Members to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a practising NHS psychiatrist Before I address the motion and speak in support of the Queen’s Speech and its focus on health and social care, I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Ealing North (James Murray). I have no doubt that he will have the eloquence of his predecessor—somebody we in the House knew for his many jovial speeches. I also have no doubt that he will match the diligence that his predecessor showed as a constituency MP in fighting for the needs of his local residents, not least by standing up for his local NHS and maintaining a health service locally that meets the needs of people in Ealing. I wish the hon. Gentleman very well in all that he does in this place Many commendable and positive things can be recognised in the contribution by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. He rightly talked about the need for increased investment in the health service and about the need to support the staff who work on the frontline. He rightly identified the need to improve mental health provision and talked about the need to find political consensus on social care I intend to talk briefly about a couple of those issues, but before I do so it is worth observing that we now have a new Prime Minister and the Government have a strong mandate. That is an opportunity to reflect on what we could do as a Government to improve the legislation that we ourselves have passed that has perhaps had unintended consequences. There is a particular concern among patients and people who work in the NHS about the fragmentation of services, which has been the result of the sometimes market-driven approach to the delivery of healthcare and the encroachment of the private sector on the delivery of traditional NHS services As a clinician, what matters most to me is that we deliver the right services for patients. We need to recognise that the involvement of private sector provision has sometimes led to greater fragmentation and a lack of joined-up care for patients. In particular, if we look at how addiction services are commissioned, we see the impacts of that on increasing homelessness and people not getting treatment in a timely manner, or on the joined-up care with the NHS afterwards. If we look at how some sexual health services are now commissioned, we see that they are done in a fragmented way that often lets patients fall through the cracks. With a fresh mandate and a new Prime Minister, I hope we have an opportunity to look at that and be honest that the answer is not always in the market—that the answer is in well-funded, properly delivered public services that are free at the point of need and often run by the state. We have to be honest about that and recognise where we could do things better in future The second point I wish to make is on the need to value our staff. NHS staff have had a difficult period, with wage restraint and morale issues—for example, as a result of the junior doctor dispute. We also need to recognise the challenges relating to the NHS workforce that Brexit has brought into focus. We are very reliant, and have been historically, on the contributions made by members of the NHS who come from all over the world, from within the EU and from throughout the country, and frankly our NHS could not work without them. We are very grateful for those contributions and it is right that we support those people in our NHS Of course we need to focus on improving the number of British-trained graduates across the health service, but we also need to recognise that the staffing crisis is the biggest issue that we now face. If we want to realise the ambition to increase nursing numbers and GP appointments, we have to recognise that across the piece there is a need to take staff training, recruitment and retention seriously. We need to look at the fact that in different parts of the United Kingdom—for example, the north-west or the north-east—there are fundamental staffing challenges and a difficulty in recruiting and retaining staff that is much more acute than it may well be in the south of England. I know the Government want to look at that, but we need to come up with meaningful answers We need to look overseas at examples in Australia, where they have to cover a very large land mass. They have had challenges attracting staff to work in parts of rural Queensland and the Northern Territory; we need to take lessons from those healthcare systems and apply them here so that we can address workforce shortages on the frontline. Without the staff, we cannot deliver the care. It is all very well to talk about improvements in patient safety and other things, but unless we have the staff to do it, we cannot deliver it. I hope that there is now an opportunity for the Government to grip these issues. Staff planning takes more than just one parliamentary cycle until the next general election; it is a five or 10-year mission, but it is one that we need to grip now if we do not want to have lasting workforce shortages in many regions of this country In particular, I draw the attention of those on the Treasury Bench to the challenges that we face in mental health. It is absolutely right and commendable that we have focused on destigmatising mental health and on the importance of mental health liaison services. Professor Simon Wessely did a welcome review of the Mental Health Act 1983 that was long overdue. I am sure we will address those issues We have to recognise that community mental health services have been substantially the Cinderella of mental health services for far too long. If we want to improve care and prevent people with mental ill health from getting so unwell that they need to turn up at hospital, we need to recognise that the primary focus of investment in mental health services—indeed, one of the issues we face is a staffing crisis in mental health, with reducing numbers of frontline mental health nurses in the community—must be in community services. They have been hollowed out for too long and now need investment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons.u330	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-16	Poulter, Daniel Leonard James	Support Queen's Speech on healthcare	2020-01-16 00:00:00	2020-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	Introducing Third Reading, the Lord Chancellor said that this is not a quickie divorce Bill. It is a quickie divorce Bill—six months sounds pretty quick to me. The Lord Chancellor said it does not undermine marriage. This Bill does undermine marriage, because it can be dissolved without people giving any reasons at all—indeed, it forces people to get divorced without giving any reasons. The Lord Chancellor said it does not undermine reconciliation. Well, it certainly does nothing for reconciliation The amendments we proposed were moderate. We simply asked for more time—from six months to nine months or one year. All our amendments have been swept aside by the Government. In the last vote, we asked for more money to be given for reconciliation. The Government brought the full might of their machine to vote down our amendment—a very moderate amendment. Divorce costs us £50 billion a year, but we are spending only £10 million. In his introduction, the Secretary of State said that the Bill is not coming at the wrong time. It is the wrong time—precisely the wrong time, when relationships are under so much strain. We have a fundamental principal objection to the Bill. The Bill furthers the claim that the present law is based on hypocrisy. Leaving aside the fact that no one has to allege fault, this is part of a liberal point of view that getting rid of any sort of moral compass in society and any pain means that society will suddenly become painless. No doubt the next argument used by our Government will be that our present abortion laws are based on hypocrisy, because anyone can get an abortion but they have to give a reason, so why not have abortion on demand all the way through? Or they will say that our present laws on euthanasia are based on hypocrisy, because in reality we all know that many people are not kept alive and their lives are quietly ended painlessly, so let us have euthanasia. We will have abortion on demand and euthanasia on demand, and we have divorce on demand I tell right hon. and hon. Members that if they get rid of pain, if they get rid of all moral compass, they will find that it is not the process of divorce that causes the pain; it is the fact of divorce and the fact that we have one of the highest rates of marital breakdown in the world. It is a bad Bill, it is a quickie divorce Bill, it comes at the wrong time, and we do not agree with it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u422	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Leigh, Edward Julian Egerton	Opposition to quickie divorce Bill	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Lady for coming back on that point, which I was about to address. Local authorities can make arrangements for the supply of specialist support for mainstream schools by staff working in pupil referral units. The Department’s innovation fund has funded projects that include such measures and links between AP and schools. If she is unhappy with my response, and if she writes to me about a specific case, I will be happy to look at that as well I thank the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Vicky Foxcroft), my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West and the hon. Member for Strangford, who is no longer in his seat, for contributing to this debate. I also pay tribute to the hard work of schools and local authorities, which continue to give their best and to raise the standards of our education system.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons.u387	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-22	Zahawi, Nadhim	Specialist support options for schools	2019-01-22 00:00:00	2019-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons	That adds to the unfairness of it. Redrow is not unique in this, and all these companies need to look at themselves, the business model they are adopting and the ethics involved I will conclude by asking the Minister three questions. First, may I invite her to join me in condemning Redrow and the other companies that are still involved in this practice? Does she agree that the freehold purchase cost of 10 times the ground rent is fair and reasonable, whereas 26 times is sheer daylight robbery? Finally, does she agree that it is desperately important that we have legislation to curtail the naked greed of those developers engaged in this disreputable practice?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-05-commons.u613	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-05	Howarth, George Edward	Condemn unfair business practices	2019-09-05 00:00:00	2019-09-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-commons	I very much hope that we will not have another national lockdown at all. One of the reasons that we have toughened up tier 3 is to ensure that, if areas are in tier 3, we can get the virus coming down as opposed to just flattening at a high rate, as we were seeing earlier. In that way, I hope that we can prevent the whole country from ever having to see the sorts of restrictions that we have had to introduce in order to keep people safe.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-commons.u166	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-23	Hancock, Matthew John David	Avoid national lockdown	2020-11-23 00:00:00	2020-11-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer, because financial difficulty is a really difficult problem. I was lucky enough to visit St John’s in Hinckley, at the request of the Rev. Gary Weston, where he showed me their food bank and the food parcels that they deliver to provide support locally. One of the questions that he wanted me to ask today was about better joining up with local government and raising awareness of what churches can do, because they can respond very quickly to provide support for local people in need. What steps is my hon. Friend taking to ensure that that can happen?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u135	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Evans, Luke Morgan	Food bank support coordination	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-lords	My Lords, we aim to keep pace with whatever happens in Europe after we leave the EU. However, we have made clear that, while we are leaving the EU, we have committed to strengthen our co-operation with Europe on security, our intelligence services have highly effective co-operation to build on, and, of course, the foundation of European security since 1949 has been the NATO alliance, which will not change.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-08-lords.u26	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-08	Curzon, Frederick Richard Penn	UK security cooperation continues	2020-01-08 00:00:00	2020-01-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. The point he makes about the way in which this House debates these matters is important. He has led a local authority, Oldham, brought people together and brought communities together, and achieved things—that is something this Government have lamentably failed to do. If the—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons.u390	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-29	Corbyn, Jeremy Bernard	Government failing community cohesion	2019-01-29 00:00:00	2019-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-09-lords	My Lords, before we begin Oral Questions, I would like to say just a few words about proceedings on Wednesday 4 November. During the consideration of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (No. 4) Regulations 2020 a noble Lord who was participating virtually attempted to move an amendment in his name, but was unable to do so because advance notice had not been given. The Clerk of the Parliaments has referred the matter to the Procedure Committee for consideration at its next meeting, and I am confident that it will give it speedy consideration Oral Questions will now commence. Please will those asking supplementary questions keep them brief and confined to two points. I ask that Ministers’ answers are also brief.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-09-lords.u3	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-09	Fowler, Peter	Procedure issue and Oral Questions	2020-11-09 00:00:00	2020-11-09 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons	I ask the Minister to speak with some urgency to Oil & Gas UK about the situation of offshore workers. In the last week or so, I have received representations from constituents who are offshore, who have had their crew change delayed and so have to work extra weeks. Some are concerned that going offshore may take them into an environment in which they are not properly protected. Can he assure us that while offshore workers may well be out of sight, they will not be out of mind?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons.u39	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-25	Carmichael, Alexander Morrison	Offshore workers' safety concerns	2020-03-25 00:00:00	2020-03-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons	I pay tribute to the men and women who work at Veterans UK. They have been working with historical records—paper records—for a long time. It could be a fairly unloved part of what the Government do. We are completely changing that and digitising all these records. It is our ambition that veterans’ care is in the palm of people’s hands, on a smartphone application by the end of this Government, and we will make sure that this is the best country in the world in which to be a veteran.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons.u127	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-21	Mercer, John Luther	Digitizing veterans' records for accessibility	2020-09-21 00:00:00	2020-09-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons	My hon. Friend is entirely right. That is why there is a massive increase not just in primary school funding, not just in secondary school funding, but in SEND funding across the country, giving local people the power to set up special educational needs schools where they desire. We will fund them, and we will support them.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons.u53	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-14	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Increased education and SEND funding	2019-10-14 00:00:00	2019-10-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-lords	The issue raised by the noble Lord is extremely distressing. I would advise members of the general public perhaps not to approach individuals themselves, but to speak to transport operators, either the station staff or the driver if they are on a bus. If there is a continual refusal to wear a face covering without an appropriate exemption, in those circumstances the police could, and indeed should, be called. I do not want members of the public to put themselves at risk to encourage people to wear face coverings.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-25-lords.u112	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-25	Vere, Charlotte	Report mask refusals to authorities	2020-06-25 00:00:00	2020-06-25 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-08-commons	Via the Domestic Abuse Bill, which was debated last week, a number of steps are being taken in the direction that the hon. Lady points towards. I repeat the point I made a moment ago about the additional funding for the victims of rape: there has been a 50% increase, which I hope will increase provision of the kind that the hon. Lady rightly calls for.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-08-commons.u30	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-08	Philp, Chris Ian Brian Mynott	Fund domestic abuse, increase support	2019-10-08 00:00:00	2019-10-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-29-commons	Of course, it is up to the Government of the day to set out their position, but I would hope that, at the point at which Parliament debates and votes on this again on Monday—that is happening only because the Government have failed so abysmally—the Government might have the courtesy to have their listening ears on and be prepared to hear what Parliament may be willing to support I have said my piece. The Government need to listen, and they must rule out a no deal. We need to make sure we are moving forward. We need a longer extension and, ultimately, we will need to go back to the people, because we are now three years on from the referendum. Things have moved on. The public are not fools, and they can see when things are not working and when this Government have let them down. I rest my case.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-29-commons.u144	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-29	Hillier, Margaret Olivia	Government should listen to Parliament	2019-03-29 00:00:00	2019-03-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons	As an engineer, I think the hon. Lady will know that a bell is not telecoms infrastructure, but we will leave that to one side. The important issue that she raises is one on which there is some cross-party agreement. We are completely committed to rolling out gigabit-capable networks across this country. That means building on the work of the superfast programme to ensure that we deliver the infrastructure needed across the country. The plan for that will come forward. I hope she will welcome the news that, immediately after questions, we will be heading to No. 10 to meet the broadband providers, to ensure that the industry can come together to deliver the best possible infrastructure, which this country needs.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons.u6	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-16	Warman, Matthew Robert	Commitment to gigabit network rollout	2020-01-16 00:00:00	2020-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Both Houses of Parliament have tonight strongly made clear their view that a no deal would be deeply damaging to jobs, manufacturing and the security of our country, and they have also set out support for the Prime Minister in securing an agreement later this week. But these are unprecedented circumstances, so can I please put on record my strong thanks to the Clerks of the House who have made it possible for us to put forward this cross-party legislation in these very unusual circumstances? We are hugely grateful for the Clerks’ expertise, without which it would not be possible for any Back Bencher or any Member to propose amendments or legislation in any form. That has proved particularly important in these extremely unusual and fast-moving circumstances.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u580	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Cooper, Yvette	Thanks to House Clerks	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-commons	My right hon. Friend makes an interesting point. She will know that in terms of the epidemiology and the guidance, that is for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, but she is right with these questions to point to the economic impact of the measures. That is something on which we continue to have close dialogue with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that she gets the clarification she seeks.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-commons.u167	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-03	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Economic impact of health measures	2020-11-03 00:00:00	2020-11-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords	My Lords, hybrid proceedings will now resume. Some Members are here in the Chamber, respecting social distancing, while others are participating remotely, but all Members will be treated equally. If the capacity of the Chamber is exceeded, I will immediately adjourn the House I will call Members to speak in the order listed in the annexe to today’s list. Interventions during speeches or before the noble Lord sits down are not permitted and uncalled speakers will not be heard. Other than the mover of an amendment or the Minister, Members may speak only once on each group. Short questions of elucidation after the Minister’s response are permitted but discouraged. A Member wishing to ask such a question, including Members in the Chamber, must email the clerk. The groupings are binding, and it will not be possible to degroup an amendment for separate debate. A Member intending to press an amendment already debated to a Division should have given notice in the debate. Leave should be given to withdraw amendments. In putting the question, I will collect voices in the Chamber only. If a Member taking part remotely intends to trigger a Division, they should make this clear when speaking on the group.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-15-lords.u121	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-15	Duncan, Ian	Hybrid proceedings; order and rules	2020-09-15 00:00:00	2020-09-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-01-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right to support her local pubs and in what she said about keeping the economy going while we deal with this problem. She is also right that there are large swathes of the country with very low infection rates, including Derbyshire. Our approach is to take the minimum national action necessary to ensure that the rates stay low in Derbyshire and other areas with low rates, while also taking more action in places where the virus is rife. That is an approach that we will be strengthening over the weeks to come.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-01-commons.u182	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-01	Hancock, Matthew John David	Support for local pubs economy	2020-10-01 00:00:00	2020-10-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons	My hon. Friend will know that in 2017 the UK was the second biggest market in the EU for ultra low emission vehicles. Alfa Power, a company in my constituency, is a fine example of British engagement in the sector. What steps is he taking to further the sector’s progress? Next time he is in Yorkshire, will he visit Alfa Power to see the great work it is doing in electric charging points throughout Yorkshire?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons.u34	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-11	Jenkyns, Andrea Marie	Promote zero-emission vehicles progress	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons	I do not agree. I think there will be a gain. The Treasury Committee has been quite clear that we do not think there is a deal dividend, as the Chancellor has described it, but I think there would be a benefit in terms of stability for businesses and individuals in this country Changes have been secured to the withdrawal agreement that was considered in this House in the middle of January. I have been very happy to be part of the alternative arrangements working group, and I thank the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union for his engagement. I started this process as something of a sceptic, but believing that compromise had to be found to make this work. There are alternative arrangements, on the basis of existing customs checks and processes, that can be put in place to ensure that there is no hard border on the island of Ireland.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons.u404	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-12	Morgan, Nicky	Support for compromise and stability	2019-03-12 00:00:00	2019-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons	It has been a genuine privilege to hear the speeches today. They have been powerful, poignant and humorous, but above all, on every single occasion, principled. From whichever point of view people have approached this argument, it has been from a position of principle. As I say, it has been an enormous privilege to have heard it Before I respond to the amendments and new clauses, let me make some brief introductory remarks. First, there is a suggestion that the Government are somehow diffident about marriage; that is not so. We recognise—and we are not diffident about saying it—that marriages and civil partnerships are vital to society. Why? It is because they are a way in which couples can not only formally express their commitment to each other but, yes, contribute, through stable relationships, to stable communities. I support marriage and the Government support marriage.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-17-commons.u406	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-17	Chalk, Alexander John Gervase	Supporting marriage and principled debate	2020-06-17 00:00:00	2020-06-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-lords	My Lords, I did not raise it because soil is a devolved matter and it will therefore be for the other Administrations to work on this. All I can say is that soil is an asset of great value across the country. In Defra’s collaborations and discussions with all Ministers from all the Administrations, soil and its health are clearly of national interest—by that, I mean for the United Kingdom.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-lords.u18	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-08	Gardiner, John Eric	Soil health national interest UK	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons	May I associate myself with the comments of my hon. Friend the Minister of State about Bloody Sunday? The shadow Secretary of State has pre-empted me, but I too have a debt of gratitude to George Hamilton, the Chief Constable of the PSNI The Government fully support efforts to promote peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland. I was pleased to announce earlier this month that about £300 million of UK Government funding will be committed to projects to support peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland between 2021 and 2027.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons.u14	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-30	Bradley, Karen Anne	Peace funding for Northern Ireland	2019-01-30 00:00:00	2019-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons	I am grateful for that answer, but the review was announced in October 2017 after my Adjournment debate. It closed in February 2018 and last July, the Minister told me that it would be published as soon as possible after the summer recess. We had more assurances in the Public Bill Committee, when I tabled further amendments, but we still have no answers to give the victims of those lethal weapons. What do the Government have to say to the families of those who have been killed and to those who have been injured, such as people in my constituency and in that of my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (David Hanson)?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons.u50	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-01	Smyth, Karin Marguerite	Where is promised review?	2019-04-01 00:00:00	2019-04-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords	My Lords, I, too, thank the noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, for his stirring and comprehensive opening and for this debate. I declare a couple of interests: I work for BBC Radio and for Sky Arts This debate has covered a wide and impressive canvas, but I am going to stick to the BBC licence fee, an issue which is current and of great importance in my world and many of our worlds, including those of many of the elderly in this country The BBC’s decision to limit free licence fees to those over 75 who receive pension credit and to take the £0.25 billion-a-year hit from its own funds—i.e. from us, the licence fee payers—seems to me to be a difficult solution, arrived at with a great deal of pain, to a problem not of its own making. A lifeline has been thrown to the poorest in our society, which shows how the BBC, out of our funds, is taking on a government job When several years ago the Government steamrollered the BBC into accepting responsibility for giving the licence fee free to all pensioners, it was seen as something that just happened under the yoke of government austerity at that time. Like many others, I thought it was a bad idea. The BBC licence fee is there to support BBC programmes; it is the responsibility of the state to support pensioners. This has been said again and again, from the beginning of this debate and throughout. This move by the Government crossed a boundary. It was a mean snatch-and-grab raid which the BBC board at the time could summon up neither the wit nor the nerve to resist, which it was its duty to do The BBC’s independence from government is an essential pillar of its constitution, still admired throughout the world—unlike, sadly, our own current constitutional antics. Yet the BBC, with its 347 million viewers around the world each week, along with the 91% of the adult population of this country who use it every day, is still the gold standard in broadcasting globally, domestically and locally. My own view remains the same: the BBC should not have to shoulder the Government’s social policy. It is already shouldering four times more television channels, twice as many national radio stations and new web services for 24% less in real terms than 20 years ago because of the clamping down on the licence fee. Had the BBC continued to accept the diktat and given everyone over 75 a free licence, when it is widely proved that many pensioners are very willing and able—more able, often, than the younger population—to pay that £3 a week fee, that tax would soon soar to £1 billion a year, resulting in the loss of channels and numerous programmes that are vital to the lives of many, especially those who live on their own and find in television and radio programmes entertainment, solace, companionship and conversation The BBC has woven together a tapestry, a niche in minority programmes, unlike anything else in the world. The armada coming over from America will do nothing about that; nothing to help that; nothing to replace that. It is unique in this country and unique to this country. We need all the evidence that we can muster to show that we in this country are still capable of making things that are universally valuable, widely available and richly rewarding. That is what the BBC does. It can continue to do that if the Government stop penalising it, begin to cherish it and see it for what it is: something great that we have. It does not need the Government to undermine it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords.u122	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-13	Bragg, Melvyn	Reject BBC licence fee policy	2019-06-13 00:00:00	2019-06-13 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons	In 2018, Northumberland and Tyne and Wear exported goods worth £496 million to the US, £130 million to Japan, £24 million to New Zealand and £216 million to Australia. Against a backdrop of rising trade barriers, our FTAs will secure and protect existing trade, and, according to our analysis, FTAs with the US, Japan, Australia and New Zealand will go further and bring additional export opportunities to every part of the country, including Blyth Valley.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons.u49	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-18	Stuart, Graham Charles	FTAs ensure and expand exports	2020-06-18 00:00:00	2020-06-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	The Attorney General’s Office has regular engagement with the Crown Prosecution Service, and we know that the issue of community engagement is of key importance to the CPS. In May 2018, it launched its inclusion and community engagement strategy in addition to the existing consultation groups and scrutiny panels, all of which are pivotal in building trust with all communities in relation to CPS decisions.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u117	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Leigh (Frazer), Lucy Claire	CPS community engagement strategy launched	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-commons	Grenfell should not have happened and it is a stain on this place that it did, but my words will be of no comfort to the victims and relatives of those left behind. I think I was sitting in the Chair where you are now, Madam Deputy Speaker, when I listened to the maiden speech by the hon. Member for Kensington (Emma Dent Coad). She has spent two years of her time here fighting tirelessly on behalf of her constituents. Those who report on these matters are fixated with Brexit and with who is or is not visiting our country, but in eight days it will be the second anniversary of the nightmare, and I pay tribute to the ways that the hon. Lady has ensured that Grenfell is not forgotten in this place. She has become vice-chair of the all-party fire safety rescue group. A number of other colleagues in the Chamber also bring their expertise to that group, whether that is a former fire Minister who leads on fire safety in leasehold properties, a colleague with expertise in white goods, or another who brings with him 31 years of service in the fire brigade. It is probably the best all-party group with which I am involved The world was horrified when we saw a tower block ablaze in the fourth or fifth wealthiest country in the world, and it should never, never, have happened. Over the past six years, the all-party group has met resistance when seeking improvements to fire safety, despite compelling evidence that such measures should be introduced. In the 13 years since regulations were last reviewed, nothing has happened. It is perhaps rather easier for a Conservative Member to make those points than it would be for other Members, because we should never have got to the position of the Grenfell Tower fire tragedy, especially after the warnings and recommendations from the coroner after the Lakanal House fire and the 2013 inquest, the rule 43 letter to the Secretary of State—I am glad to see the Home Secretary in his place—the large number of letters exchanged between me and numerous Ministers, and meetings with successive Ministers It brings no comfort to the victims of Grenfell if we blame. It is the fault of the Conservative Government, the coalition Government, the Labour Government—it is the fault of every Member of Parliament that our voice was not heard and the recommendations were not listened to. Speaking at the Local Government Association fire safety conference on 4 July, the Minister for Policing and the Fire Service said that “we may have to confront an awkward truth…that over many years and perhaps against the backdrop of, as data shows, a reduced risk in terms of fire, in terms of number of incidents and deaths, that maybe as a system some complacency has crept in. ” The questions to which we need an answer are: has enough been done? What has changed? What difference has been made? The official answer is that immediately after the fire, the Government announced a public inquiry under Sir Martin Moore-Bick. They appointed Dame Judith Hackitt to undertake an independent review of building regulations. They established an independent expert panel, chaired by Sir Ken Knight, and set up a comprehensive website at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government that lists all actions then taken and proposed. It is therefore not true to say that nothing has been done, but not enough has been done. The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, and the Home Office, would retain overall joint responsibility for the measures to be taken, and as the hon. Member for Kensington said, it is for others to talk about how the housing situation has been dealt with Whether enough has been done during these two years depends on what perspective we take. The Government have established a public inquiry, an independent panel of experts, and a building regulations review. There have been calls for evidence, working groups, and Committees have been pointed in a direction of travel, with instructions to those who were guilty of a “race to the bottom” to fix things. There are Departments full of people and a website stacked with volumes of literature and guidance, but there is little by way of prescriptive action and that is the frustration of the all-party group To his credit, the Secretary of State has banned combustible materials from high-risk buildings over 18 metres and desktop studies, and he has extended the removal of dangerous materials on private sector flats. But why not all high-risk buildings, not just those over 18 metres? Why are we still building single staircase high-rise flats? This is crazy! Why are we still building new schools without making it mandatory for them to contain sprinklers? It is six years since the Lakanal House fire and disaster, and the coroner’s letter to the former Secretary of State has still not been properly acted on. The classic example is the encouragement for retrofitting sprinklers in all tall flats, which was recommended by the coroner after the Lakanal House fire.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-commons.u278	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-06	Amess, David Anthony Andrew	Grenfell tragedy systemic failure systemic inaction	2019-06-06 00:00:00	2019-06-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords	My Lords, I will keep my remarks brief and try to avoid duplication—difficult at this time of night. As a member of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, I must put on record, along with the great majority of the 100 or so speakers today, my deep disquiet that, in proposing the Bill, our Government have shown such disregard both for the international reputation of this country and for one of the most fundamental principles of our democracy: the supremacy of Parliament I applaud my noble and learned friend Lord Judge on his very powerful speech. I agree with every word of it and will certainly be supporting his Motion. For the sake of Britain’s standing in the world, I implore the Government to ensure that the Bill never reaches the statute book unless Clauses 44, 45 and 47 are removed, along with most, I would say, of the Henry VIII clauses, which have absolutely not been adequately justified by the Government's memorandum to Parliament on the Bill For the sake of the health of our democracy, I trust that the Government will respond positively to the appeal, in a letter to Michael Gove and Jacob Rees-Mogg, from the chairs of the Constitution Committee, the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee and the Secondary Legislation Committee. The letter sets out the considerable concerns of the members of all three committees about the truly extraordinary delegation of powers to Ministers in recent Bills, not just this one—although this one, the internal market Bill, is undoubtedly the most extreme and troubling example of this trend Finally, I call on the Government to respect the conclusion of the Strathclyde review of the role of the House of Lords in relation to statutory instruments. The review made clear that, “it would be appropriate for the Government to take steps to ensure that Bills contain an appropriate level of detail and that too much is not left for implementation by statutory instrument. ” Do the Government really want to completely disregard a report commissioned by a recent Conservative Government? I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, would want your Lordships’ House to challenge the exceptionally pervasive use of Henry VIII clauses in the Bill and, indeed, the terrible Clauses 44, 45 and 47, and I very much hope that we can do this on a cross-party basis.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords.u201	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-19	Meacher, Molly Christine	Opposition to excessive delegation powers	2020-10-19 00:00:00	2020-10-19 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons	I am pleased that the Secretary of State is keen to improve public health and reduce health inequalities, and I assume that he will therefore support my new clause 5 to the Finance (No. 3) Bill, which is specifically about ensuring that the Government’s economic policies reduce health inequalities. On social care, is he aware that in 2017 alone 50,000 people with dementia had an emergency hospital admission because there was not adequate social care? What will he do to ensure that his plan, which we are still waiting for, will avoid such emergency admissions in 2019? Please do not say that more has been given in the Budget, because that is a sticking plaster compared with all the cuts that the Government have made in social care.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons.u443	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Abrahams, Deborah Angela Elspeth Marie	Support new clause reduce inequalities	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons	It is always a great pleasure to welcome my hon. Friend to Chesham and Amersham, particularly at the invitation of Paul Jennings. Does he agree that Paul Jennings is one of the most outstanding advocates for chalk streams and our environment, and that he should be praised for all the efforts that he and the River Chess Association put into trying to maintain and preserve this chalk stream for our children and our children’s children?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons.u390	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-22	Gillan, Cheryl Elise Kendall	Praise for Paul Jennings efforts	2019-07-22 00:00:00	2019-07-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-lords	My Lords, the arrival of the Government’s response is most welcome, particularly its focus on young people. However, its focus on user-generated content, company size and the large number of exceptions move it away from the earlier and more flexible focus on assessing risk and preventing harm wherever it might be found. Concerningly, it leaves the system open to being gamed as companies redesign themselves to be out of scope rather than to prevent harm. How do the Government intend to tackle problems of explicit and violent content, which is widely reported on remote learning platforms, if edtech is out of scope? How do they intend to limit access to commercial porn sites that try to avoid regulation by not having user-generated content? Can she confirm that any company that introduces strangers who are adults to children via automated friend suggestions will be brought into scope, whatever the nature or size of the service?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-lords.u158	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-16	Kidron, Beeban Tania	Edtech and porn oversight concerns	2020-12-16 00:00:00	2020-12-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons	The good news is that we already have. The Prime Minister announced it, and I talked about it at the Budget: the affordable homes programme will increase from £9 billion to £12 billion over the next few years, a significant uplift in the amount of new housing delivery—180,000 new homes, from memory. With regard to the benefits of stamp duty, the evidence we have both from economists and HMRC is that the majority of the benefit of a stamp duty cut last time around, in ’08-’09, accrued to the buyers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-commons.u283	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Sunak, Rishi	Housing funding increase	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-05-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the beauty of her town of Liskeard, and she knows that I, too, am a fan of her part of the country. The Government are totally committed to helping our high streets and town centres to adapt to changing consumer behaviour during this challenging period. To achieve that, the Government are supporting places across the country with the High Streets Task Force, which will work with local authorities and groups to get the access to the experts required to come up with the ideas and drive to build the skills for sustainable place making and share that best practice. We have also introduced reforms to planning use to enable that mixture on the high streets to drive footfall and businesses into our town centres.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-05-commons.u79	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-05	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Support for high streets	2020-10-05 00:00:00	2020-10-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons	Will the Minister and the Home Secretary pass on huge thanks to the Home Office staff, the Border Force staff and the police, who are working immensely hard on the response to the coronavirus? Given that other countries have mandatory quarantines in place for people arriving and that the Government in this country withdrew on 13 March the previous advice for travellers coming from high-risk countries such as Italy to self-isolate, does the Minister accept that it is hard to understand why there is no guidance on self-isolation on a precautionary basis for travellers coming from high-risk countries? Will he and Home Secretary look at that issue again? Will they also work with the Home Affairs Committee to ensure that they can attend remote meetings to answer our questions during this crisis?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-23-commons.u71	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-23	Cooper, Yvette	Questioning COVID-19 travel policies	2020-03-23 00:00:00	2020-03-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons	There comes a time in politics when all of us have to look at ourselves in the mirror—me included—and ask the following question: are we up to the level of events? Are we truly going to serve the people who put us here I have the honour of speaking last in what I think we would all agree is the most pivotal of parliamentary debates. I suppose that, for me, there is a sort of symmetry in this, because of the long association that I have had in supporting our membership of the European Union. I was a proud remainer, someone who campaigned assiduously for membership, and for whom the result of the referendum in June 2016 came as a bitter blow I have just heard the word “traitor” uttered sotto voce across the Chamber. That concerns me, and it should concern all of us. I do not believe that anybody in this place is a traitor. I do not believe that anybody, whatever view they might have, is somehow disloyal or dishonourable or dishonest or below the standards that we would expect in this place, because I believe that not only do we call ourselves honourable Members, we are honourable men and women. And we come here with the best of intentions: we come here in all sincerity to try and find a way through for the people we represent—to make a decision; a hard, a fast, and a specific decision at that. It is not easy, but we are here to do difficult; that is our job. We are sent here by each of our constituents to get on with it, and over the last few months the voices I hear in my constituency, as right across the country, come out loud and clear whether we were leave or remain: “For the love of God, get on with it,” is what I am being told I want to deal for a moment with the speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Steve Brine), who I thought put it extremely well. He in many respects has found himself in the sort of moral dilemma that a lot of us in this Chamber have been placed in in the last three years. He resigned from Government because of his convictions, and that is an act that speaks volumes. He put it well when he said that the best way in the circumstances—the only way—to avoid what he would regard as the problem of a no-deal Brexit is to vote for both these motions this evening. I say both these motions because the one will not work without the other. We are left with a fixed date, a date that was not chosen by us. It was never the subject of an application that we made to extend article 50, but it was a date that was chosen by our friends in the European Union: 31 October. And 31 October was not a mere caprice plucked out of the air; it was something real and meaningful for the 27. It was in their interests; it was administratively important for them, but backed by proper reason, and therefore it is something that we should respect. For a moment let us put ourselves in the shoes of our negotiating partners. They want certainty, they want to be able to move on, and they want to know that in their negotiating partner they have somebody who they can trust and rely upon.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons.u567	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-22	Buckland, Robert James	Reflective call for decisive action	2019-10-22 00:00:00	2019-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-commons	I can understand that there might be a need for some easements due to anticipated staff shortages during this crisis, but I do not understand why there are fewer safeguards on easements for children’s services than in the arrangements for adult services. What is the logic in that? Obviously visits might need to be suspended during the lockdown, but why is it necessary to suspend the six-week contact rule? Are reviews not a crucial safeguard for the interests of children and young people in the care system? Who does the Minister think benefits from removing six-monthly reviews and what does she think is the main benefit of not holding panels for prospective adopters One of the conclusions from the child sexual exploitation cases in Rotherham and Rochdale was that children placed outside their own area were all too often out of sight and out of mind, and that is why it was so easy for them to fall prey. Like the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton), I am concerned about the removal of senior-level approval for out-of-area placements. What alternative arrangements have been put in place to compensate for the loss of independent visits to children’s homes? Afterall, it is only nine years since the House was discussing the Pindown report. When you make these places less accessible, it is easier for things to happen that should not happen Like my hon. Friends, I am curious to know who the Government consulted before they implemented these arrangements. I would love to know who made representations to the Minister and who asked for these arrangements. Was it the same people who tried to impose these changes back in 2016 and 2018? Of course, the reason they were eventually scuppered back then was that there was a genuine fear across the parties that the measures were intended to relax local authority scrutiny and safeguards, save money and pave the way for further privatisation of children’s services. At the very point where this Government are rueing the fact that they made unnecessary changes to probation and are now planning to reverse them, it would be completely mad to create the same conditions for our children’s services, only to go through all this again I am a bit more sceptical than the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham—I fear that the emergency may be a smokescreen and that this is just a third attempt at the same old game. I recognise that the Minister believes that the powers are being used sparingly. She says in her letter of 15 May that they should “only be used if absolutely necessary” Is she receiving regular reports on their use? Does she have any plans to collect and publish data on the use of these emergency arrangements? Will she place in the Library an interim report on the use of these powers to date I am also curious to know why the Minister thinks that children’s services in Scotland have not been under similar pressure and do not face demands for a similar change. What does she think is different? Has she looked at that arrangement? As we have heard, the Children’s Commissioner was rather critical of these measures. Was it an oversight not to consult her? That requires a straightforward answer from the Minister. Was a children’s rights impact assessment conducted before the regulations were approved? If so, will the Minister publish it, and if not, why not?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-commons.u259	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-10	McCabe, Stephen James	Less safeguarding for children's services	2020-06-10 00:00:00	2020-06-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-commons	Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do not intend to speak for more than about five or six minutes, if that is of help to the House The seriousness of these allegations merits a high-profile and far-reaching investigation, so I thank the Opposition for tabling this motion on the Westferry scandal. In contrast, the Government appear to just hope that it will simply disappear. I am still not entirely clear from what the Secretary of State said whether the Government will oppose the motion in the Division Lobby tonight. The motion before us certainly has the full support of the SNP, and we will vote in favour of it if the Government are daft enough to push it to a Division, which I must suggest to them would not look good I must confess that I do not like the all-too-frequent fixture in our politics of calling for ministerial resignations left, right and centre. However, in this case the conduct of the Secretary of State is seriously called into question when he himself has acknowledged that this decision was made unlawfully. In any other circumstance, this would already be difficult territory for the Secretary of State to try to wriggle off the hook, but the fact that this £1 billion housing development is linked to a Tory donor means it stinks—and it stinks, frankly, to high heavens Put simply, this is a classic Tory sleaze scandal that involves money and the Conservatives scratching one another’s backs. For a minute, let us put to one side the fact that the development’s owner is Richard Desmond, a multibillionaire and former owner of the Daily Express, and look solely at the fact that the development was originally denied by the Planning Inspectorate for failing to deliver enough affordable housing. That should not be overlooked, because the Government’s record on building affordable housing, let alone social housing, is absolutely woeful. We respect the fact that the impartial Planning Inspectorate rejected the application on reasonable grounds. Most of us can follow the logic on that Here is the nub of the matter, and why the Secretary of State’s position is so weak. The decision of the impartial Planning Inspectorate was overruled by the Secretary of State on 14 January, less than 24 hours before the introduction of a community infrastructure levy that would have cost the developer £40 million. Soon after the decision to approve the project was made, Richard Desmond makes a new £12,000 donation to the Conservative party. In the eyes of the public, the Secretary of State steps in and saves the developer £40 million in the community infrastructure levy, and then miraculously, the developer later makes a donation to the Conservative party. Surely no self-respecting Member of the House, not even the keenest December-intake Member, cannot see that that absolutely stinks.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-commons.u228	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-24	Linden, David Melvyn	Opposition calls out Tory sleaze	2020-06-24 00:00:00	2020-06-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-commons	Following on from what the Leader of the House has said, there is great news in Wellingborough, where we have the electrification of the midland main line and big improvements on the Chowns Mill roundabout on the A45. There is, however, one slight problem: bridges need to be demolished to get the electrification done. As she is a Northamptonshire MP, she will know that one cannot go from the M1 to the east coast without going along the A45, but that is going to be closed westbound for nine months and the local bridges in my constituency have been demolished. Unless this is sneaky plan to keep me stuck in Wellingborough until after Brexit day, will she sneak out a written statement on Monday about how we are going to deal with this chaos?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-commons.u236	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-31	Bone, Peter William	Infrastructure issues in Wellingborough	2019-01-31 00:00:00	2019-01-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons	I thank the Minister for giving me advance sight of his statement following on from the media coverage today Last year, the Secretary of State made a speech at Battersea power station, which foreshadowed the Government’s announcement of this review today. Since 2010, Labour has said repeatedly that vocational and technical education must be put on an equal footing with academic routes to get the high-skilled workforce that we need. That imperative, given Brexit, has now accelerated, so we welcome the Government’s statement, but while we welcome the words, a lot of the details are still lacking. Will this be an entirely new suite of qualifications, or a rebadging of existing ones? Will the Minister confirm whether the Government are unveiling a plan to rebrand the existing qualifications rather than actually delivering meaningful policy change, and where do degree apprenticeships fit in with this The Department’s own policy paper acknowledges that Britain’s departure from the EU and the end of free movement may also accelerate demands for higher technical skills, so does the Minister agree that the reckless no-deal policies advocated by both candidates for his party’s leadership would damage our economy and create even greater skill shortages? Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, has said that “we’re nervous that the focus on reforming qualifications … could divert attention from the post-18 review recommendations”, which Mark Dawe at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers has echoed. Can the Minister tell the sector which of these recommendations his Department will implement All year, Members from across the House have been telling the Department that FE funding has fallen to critical levels. The Institute for Fiscal Studies found it was £3 billion down in real terms between 2010 and 2017-18. Will the Minister commit urgently to a funding uplift to ensure those world-class colleges and providers can produce the skilled workforce we need? Is the Department proposing a national approval of qualifications, and will those qualifications be given additional funding The Minister talks about the role of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education and of the Office for Students in his consultation, but with resources already stretched and concerns from the sector about delays in standard approvals and registration, how does the Minister envisage the IfA taking on this extra responsibility? What additional resources will be allocated to it? Will the IfA or the OfS be in the driving seat on delivery The Minister said that improving information, advice and guidance would be crucial to deliver the skills base we need, but how does the Department intend to do this with no extra resources available? This morning, the Secretary of State told The Guardian that he would be happy for his own son, aged nine, to take one of the new HTQs. Is it therefore not imperative that we start looking at and talking about information, advice and guidance in schools at a much earlier age—at just that sort of age—to spark inspiration and aspiration in technical careers What will be the status of the qualifications getting swept up in these changes? Will the Department ensure that qualifications are not just future-proofed but back-proofed? I ask because the Department tells us that mature students make up the majority of current higher technical students, and in 2015 over half of all HT students were studying on a part-time basis. Can we be clear that these qualifications will not be junked by the Government and employers if they have to retrain The Labour party has been developing our national education service and lifelong learning commission with the principle of progression at the heart of skills policy. To do that, we must have a proper feeder process for social mobility and social justice. This comes substantially through level 2 apprenticeships, but we have seen a 21% drop in them recently. How will the Department address that and get people to these higher-level qualifications? The Secretary of State says that students will move on from T-levels to a higher technical qualification, but can the Minister or the Secretary of State, who have failed so far to outline how students will transition from GCSEs to T-levels, tell us how students will move on from T-levels to HTQs A review of these qualifications is welcome but, given existing take-up failure with advanced learner loans, there is no guarantee it will be a game changer. How will the Government make it possible for institutions to get the staff they need to deliver more level 4 and level 5 qualifications? If T-levels are going to be a feeder into them, who is going to teach them: existing FE, school, college or training staff, recent providers, or perhaps graduates doing crash courses in T-level teaching? This announcement will require a big infusion of money beyond the existing £500 million by 2022 and a whole new approach to prioritising continuous professional development for FE staff, which the Government have consistently ignored, will be needed. The Department’s policy paper says that providers struggle to recruit and retain staff, so when will the Department address the fact that FE lecturers and other staff have seen their pay fall by thousands of pounds a year in real terms since 2010 and are still being paid thousands of pounds less than their colleagues teaching in schools?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-08-commons.u305	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-08	Marsden, Gordon	Vocational education reform concerns raised	2019-07-08 00:00:00	2019-07-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons	The hon. Lady makes an important point about accountability. Is she not dismayed, as I sometimes am, that in Wales the true test of accountability, which is the ability to remove a party of government, has not been exercised under devolution? Throughout the past 20 years and all the turbulence of British politics, during which we have seen big changes in Scotland and in Westminster, we have not seen any major changes in Welsh politics. We still have, basically, one-party rule, so accountability is not ever fully exercised.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-11-commons.u347	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-11	Crabb, Stephen	Welsh politics lacks accountability	2019-07-11 00:00:00	2019-07-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons	When I visited Rwanda in 2002 I had the misfortune to see some horrific scenes as a result of the genocide, and it was made very clear to me then that justice has to be part of the reconciliation process. A lot of progress has been made in Rwanda—I visited again last year and saw some of that progress—but will the Government continue to work with Rwanda to ensure it can continue making progress while, at the same time, recognising that justice is an important part of that recovery process?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons.u220	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-09	Robertson, Laurence Anthony	Support Rwandan justice progress	2019-04-09 00:00:00	2019-04-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-commons	I thank everybody who spoke in the debate today and all the right hon. and hon. Members who have engaged with the Bill throughout From many speakers, especially at the beginning of the debate, we heard about exactly what businesses and people throughout the country have wanted—the certainty and consistency that the Bill will deliver. Unfortunately, we have heard, as we have throughout the Bill’s passage, a lot of inconsistency from Opposition Members. We have heard the SNP talk about the fact that we are not going to get a trade deal with America but, by the way, when we do, we have to accept chlorinated chicken. Neither of those things are true. We have heard that people want the Government to change and negotiate and work with the European negotiating team, but when we reach out to them to explain what part 5 of the Bill is all about and the fact that we will not need a safety net should we get successful talks in the Joint Committee, it is described as shambolic. Which would people like? Would they like change? I think we want certainty People have talked about the need for devolution in Northern Ireland and the need to respect Northern Irish businesses and the parties in Northern Ireland and give their businesses certainty, but Opposition Members will vote against part 5 and, in doing so, vote against unfettered access for Northern Ireland into GB We heard an SNP Member describe the UK Government as a boa constrictor, yet they want independence from the UK Government and from the other nations to go back to the boa constrictor that is the EU We need the Bill and these clauses now because parliamentary time dictates as much and we want the legislation to be ready for the end of the transition phase, whatever happens in the remaining days of discussions with the EU. I wish both sides well in their discussions To conclude, the UK’s internal market has been the bedrock of our shared prosperity for centuries. It has enabled businesses and individuals to thrive and has been the source of unhindered and open trade throughout the country. It has helped to demonstrate that our country is greater as a Union than the sum of its parts The Government are committed to safeguarding the Union. We fully support devolution and continue to put the Union at the heart of everything we do. I very much believe that the four corners of the UK are stronger together and that the Bill supports and respects the devolution settlements. Some Members have said that the Bill is a threat to devolution, but in reality they are trying to further their narrow political arguments rather than look at the wider political arguments. Their narrow political arguments about independence have nothing to do with devolution I stress that the proposals in the Bill are designed to ensure that devolution can continue to work for everyone. All devolved policy areas will stay devolved and the proposals ensure only that there are no new barriers to UK internal trade. Indeed, at the end of the transition period hundreds of powers that are currently exercised by the EU will flow back to the UK. Many of these powers will fall within the competence of the devolved Administrations, and this flow therefore represents a substantial transfer of powers to the devolved Administrations that they did not exercise before the EU exit The Bill is vital in preserving our internal market and continuing to provide certainty for businesses as we seek to recover from covid-19, prepare for the opportunities after the transition period and protect jobs. It will ensure that UK businesses can trade across our four home nations in a way that helps them to invest and create jobs, just as they have for hundreds of years. I want to emphasise again that the Government have been, and will continue to be, reasonable in discussions on this Bill. We made many positive changes, and they are on the table, but ultimately the Government need to balance this with the need to deliver a Bill that provides the certainty that businesses want and the need to invest and create jobs. I therefore call on hon. Members to support the Government in these objectives, which I believe we all share, when they vote today Question put, That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 1.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-07-commons.u412	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-07	Scully, Paul Stuart	Support Bill for business certainty	2020-12-07 00:00:00	2020-12-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-24-commons	It is now clear that, instead of dying in a ditch, the Prime Minister has ditched the ditch. Is the Leader of the House aware of the problems that are going to be caused in many communities by having an election as late as 12 December in terms of dark evenings and short hours—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-24-commons.u590	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-24	Gapes, Michael John	Election date concerns	2019-10-24 00:00:00	2019-10-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	IGC	The Independent Group for Change	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords	As I have tried to point out to noble Lords, we are certainly looking to act as soon as we can when we have had the opportunity to review all the evidence presented. Certainly, the scientific evidence in this area is very strong, but there are two other factors that we must consider: the operability of any changes we impose—because we would not want to get that wrong—and public opinion. In other countries, there is public opinion against the mass medication of foods, and we need to make sure that the public are behind this as well.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords.u18	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-19	Vere, Charlotte	Awaiting evidence review and consent	2019-03-19 00:00:00	2019-03-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-lords	My Lords, I too congratulate the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Gloucester on securing this debate and all noble Lords who have spoken on this important issue. I am grateful for this opportunity to set out the Government’s approach to improving early years interventions. I hope that the level of co-ordination, although not perfect, will assure the right reverend Prelate and other noble Lords that we are moving in the right direction The approach of the Government is based on a number of principles: that early, rather than late, intervention is the key, as noble Lords have outlined; that it is central government’s role to support, facilitate and work with local government and other partners to tackle the issues together; that our solutions should be focused on outcomes and underpinned by evidence; and that successful strategies should be identified and shared widely This is the first debate in my widened portfolio, and it is a serious and complex matter. It straddles a number of central government departments, including the Department for Education, obviously, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department of Health and Social Care and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. But a co-ordinated approach to tackling early intervention is what the Government aim to achieve. There are meetings between the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care on the advisory programme board to ensure that there is co-ordination across government. The noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, mentioned the Welsh example, which is open to the What Works institutions that the department has set up—so there is a spread internationally and from the devolved institutions The need for a national strategy has been clearly outlined to me by many noble Lords. That need is under review, but I will take back to the department the clear message that while co-ordination with local government is essential, noble Lords also believe that a national strategy is valuable in this area. With this co-ordination in mind, the Government have prioritised three areas: first, improving social mobility, supported in the early years by high-quality early education settings and learning in the home; secondly, protecting vulnerable children through effective children’s social care; and, thirdly, improving mental and physical health in pregnancy and childhood. This is underpinned by our work to empower local areas to improve multiagency working and build the evidence base—not necessarily the type of research that the noble Lord, Lord Mawson, would talk about—for what works Early educational entitlements are not a panacea, but there is extensive evidence to demonstrate that high-quality childcare supports children’s development and prepares younger children for school. This is why the Government have made sure that all three and four year-olds, and disadvantaged two year-olds, can now access at least 15 hours of free childcare each week. In 2020-21, this is at a cost of £3.6 billion As many noble Lords outlined, when children start their formal education, the reception year presents a window of opportunity to address the key development gaps between disadvantaged children and their peers, before they have a chance to widen. The noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, mentioned disadvantaged two year-olds. The take-up rose from 58% in 2015 to 68% in 2019, but there was a slight decrease last year, so the department is working with the Family and Childcare Trust and Coram to ensure that there is an upward trajectory in the take-up for those disadvantaged two year-olds The noble Baroness, Lady Armstrong, and the noble Lord, Lord Addington, focused on the early years foundation stage. Too many children leave the reception year with poor outcomes, and the current assessment system involves too much paperwork and reduces the time that reception teachers have to support children. The proposed reforms to the early years foundation stage profile will free up teachers to interact with and support children to ensure that they develop the rich vocabulary, skills and behaviours that they need to thrive in school and to access the education on offer to them. There is good news in relation to this assessment: in 2013, 51.7% of children achieved a good developmental score; by 2019, it was 71.8%. The assessment of language and development skills will also be introduced into the universal child assessment for all two year-olds. We have also set a 10-year ambition to halve the proportion of children who finish their reception year without the necessary language and literacy skills they need to thrive. The home learning environment, as many noble Lords outlined, is also important. We are supporting parents to improve the quality and quantity of adult-child interactions—a point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett. A three-year campaign called Hungry Little Minds has been launched by the department to encourage parents to chat, play and read with their children—the noble Baroness, Lady Prosser, talked about a very moving example she witnessed on public transport—so that they can help to set their children up for school and beyond. We are taking a society-wide approach to get that message out, with different organisations, including charities and businesses, playing their part. The campaign will build on the department’s work with the National Literacy Trust. An interesting example arising from that partnership has been the work of Penguin Random House with Arriva, the train company, to give away books at stations and to train staff to have the confidence to interact with young children on public transport. So we all have a responsibility when we interact with children to help improve their outcomes Looking beyond parents, charities and businesses, we are committed to supporting the workforce in this sector to gain the appropriate skills and knowledge—a point made by the right reverend Prelate and the noble Lord, Lord Addington. Alongside our training of 1,000 health visitors to identify and support children with speech, language and communication needs, we have invested £20 million to ensure that practitioners in disadvantaged areas have access to high-quality professional development. On the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Watson, we are also supporting graduates into the sector through funding the Early Years Initial Teacher Training programme, including fees, bursaries and employer incentives In relation to the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, and the noble Lord, Lord Addington, early help of course plays an important role in promoting safe and stable families. It is about supporting and intervening with families at the right time and in the right way. Of course, that does not detract from the need for statutory guidance: Working Together to Safeguard Children is clear that local areas should have a comprehensive range of effective, evidence-based services in place to address assessed needs early. Although many noble Lords have made the point in relation to children’s centres, there is a statutory underpinning that local authorities still need to meet, when looking at services, to meet the needs of the most disadvantaged in their communities. We have also strengthened the duty placed on police, heath and local authorities to work collaboratively to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Since September of last year, multiagency safeguarding partnerships have been in operation in England. We are implementing those reforms to try to see a further cultural shift in the way that police, health and local authorities work together in local areas to secure the outcomes for children I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Wyld for raising the issue of maternity and perinatal health. Since April 2019, new and expectant mothers have been able to access specialist perinatal mental health community services in every part of the country. Public Health England is currently undertaking a systematic review and refresh of the Healthy Child Programme in England to ensure that the future approach is both universal in reach and personalised in response to those families needing extra support. I am pleased to inform the right reverend Prelate that a revised health visitor and school nurse model is being looked at within that work. Also in relation to health, the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, raised the issue of childhood obesity. The Government’s childhood obesity plan sets the ambition of halving obesity by 2030, and successful initiatives include breakfast clubs and doubling the PE and sport premium up to £35 million of expenditure As I have repeatedly outlined, local areas have a key role in commissioning and delivering effective early years interventions to meet the needs of children and families, and I have some examples of where we are supporting that. First, an additional £165 million has been announced for the troubled families programme, which many noble Lords mentioned, bringing the total expenditure to over £1 billion. Of the children on that programme, 34.2% are under two, showing that this is not always an intervention that is too late. This will ensure that more families get access to the programme’s support A key aspect of the programme is the key worker, who goes in and builds a trusted relationship with a family, with practical instructions and advice, but also helps that family access the specialist support on offer in their area. Many noble Lords referred to the fact that, often, the person needing the support is least able to be the advocate to go and get that support. That key worker reminds me of my noble friend Lady Wyld’s reference to the people who are around to help you in those years. As the noble Lord, Lord Mawson, said, it is the person who is on your side. I pay tribute to the local authorities—for schools, health provision and particularly those key workers—because this project has been and will continue to be evaluated When reading in preparation for today’s debate, there were moments that caused one to forget all the policy, the research and the words and to think about the lives that are being affected by this. The evaluation of this programme shows that, 19 to 24 months after starting to receive support, the proportion of children on the programme going into care—compared with a similar cohort—is reduced by a third. Those key workers, health professionals and local authorities have affected and changed the lives of hundreds, if not thousands, of children who, as we stand here today, are not in care and are still with their families. I thank them for all that work. Also, the proportion of adults on the programme going to prison has reduced by a quarter and juvenile convictions have reduced by 15%. So this is not an intervention that is always too late—and, of course, everybody would wish that we did not have to make any interventions with any families at all Secondly, my noble friend Lady Newlove spoke very movingly about the issues for families facing adversity. There is now the Reducing Parental Conflict programme, with £39 million of funding. I am pleased to say that 98% of first-tier local authorities have taken up work on this programme. We know that children who are exposed to parental conflict can suffer long-term harm, and intervening early to help parents reduce conflict obviously affects the outcomes for both children and parents. Through this programme, we are supporting local authorities and their partners to integrate support to reduce parental conflict into their local services for families. DWP is working with 30 local authorities across England to test eight face-to-face interventions aimed at reducing conflict. There is a theme here: it is the face-to-face, the key worker, the person who is there to intervene in situations Parental conflict is related to wider family risk factors including, for example, domestic abuse, poor mental health and substance misuse. The noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, referred to alcohol in this particular context. We are investing £6 million to improve the outcomes of children of alcohol-dependent parents who are also engaged in parental conflict. A key thing to say is that adult social services, which deal with the adult with the alcohol problem, work together with children’s social services to ensure that it is joined up The noble Lord, Lord Sheikh, asked specifically whether funding was going into local government. The early years local government programme has funding of £8.5 million and is focused on how local services work together across health, education and early help to improve the outcomes for five year-olds. As part of this work, multidisciplinary peer reviews are supporting councils to identify reforms to services, and our early outcomes fund has provided approximately £6.5 million of grants to local authority partnerships. Gloucestershire County Council, in particular, in partnership with Swindon, was successful in securing an early outcomes grant and is using the fund to develop and pilot an early language support pathway: I hope that the right reverend Prelate, with her professional background, will be very pleased to hear that that is happening in her location The local government programme also includes work by the Early Intervention Foundation to review effective models for provision. The foundation is reviewing what family hubs and children’s centres can offer. There are still more than 2,000 children’s centres and we do not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. That evaluation will look at everything that works, and I assure noble Lords that it does not matter what badge is on it: we need to focus. The needs are so acute and these children need such help that it does not matter. What matters is what works: that is the threshold. The Government will continue to champion the role of family hubs because they are a slightly different model to children’s centres—to respond to the question from my noble friend Lady Wyld I assure my noble friend Lady Newlove that we are doing all we can for those children who live through adverse and traumatic experiences in childhood, such as abuse or neglect, or who have grown up in complex family circumstances. She has, in me, someone who did not relish school holidays and who is therefore going to take seriously these matters within the department. Such experiences can, and often do, have lasting consequences for children Many noble Lords raised the issue of mental health. New mental health support teams are going to be established in 25% of the country by 2023 and the Department for Education will be funding training for senior mental health leads in schools and colleges. The Government remain strongly committed to the What Works initiative. On the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Mawson, about research, I will be going back to the department to ask about the three foundations that the department funds: the Early Intervention Foundation, the Education Endowment Foundation and the Centre for Children’s Social Care—these are “what works”. I will take back his insightful experience in the use of research and the need to monitor how far What Works is spreading from one authority to another: who is using this information to improve and share what is going on A number of noble Lords raised the issue of special educational needs, in particular the diagnosis of autism. The NICE recommendation is that the length of time between referral and first appointment to start an assessment should be no longer than three months. Learning disability and autism is one of the priorities in the NHS long-term plan. Over the next three years, autism diagnosis will be included alongside work with children’s and young people’s mental health services to test and implement the most effective ways to reduce those waiting times. I was most moved by the contributions of my noble friend Lord Astor and the noble Lord, Lord Touhig, in this space, particularly regarding children with dyslexia. The Department for Education has contracted the Whole School SEND Consortium to deliver a two-year, £3.9 million programme to help embed SEND in school improvement. As I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Addington, is aware, from 2011 to 2018 the department funded the British Dyslexia Association and other organisations to provide resources to assist schools and local authorities in early identification of those needs On funding to tackle child poverty, there is to be a 4.4% real-terms increase in the local authority settlement. The specific issue was raised that local authorities have often prioritised spending on adult social care and other areas at the expense of children’s social care. The department is working with MHCLG to develop a robust and up-to-date fair funding distribution for children’s and young people’s services, which we are aiming to implement as part of a major funding reform package from 2020-21 On child poverty, I have outlined that the 850,000 most disadvantaged two year-olds have been given free childcare places, and there is an additional 15 hours for lower income families in relation to the entitlement for three and four year-olds. There is also an early years pupil premium, which is just over £300 per pupil. It has been interesting to see how these issues all intersect and relate to that. I hope that the research into family hubs and children’s centres will enable us to look at how best we locate services and help the most disadvantaged children. The Government stand by our position that work is the most effective way to bring these children out of poverty, but of course we recognise that free childcare is needed for many parents to take advantage of that I apologise to noble Lords whose questions I have not answered, but I will conclude by responding to the two invitations I was kindly offered. The noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, invited me to the APPG. I think that may be for my honourable friend the Minister for Children and Families, but I will take the invitation back to the department. I apologise for my late response to the persistent invitations of the noble Lord, Lord Mawson, in relation to his wonderful work. I look forward to catching up with that and I hope that one of my first visits will be up to Rotherham. I thank noble Lords for their involvement in such an important debate.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-27-lords.u102	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-27	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Improving early years interventions strategy	2020-02-27 00:00:00	2020-02-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons	It is extraordinary that the House is having to debate whether the Prime Minister will abide by a law that has just been passed by Parliament, and that the same Prime Minister, who managed to be here for the Division earlier, cannot be here to answer questions from Members, and no Law Officers are present either. All the Members who have spoken raised questions—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-09-commons.u527	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-09	Corbyn, Jeremy Bernard	Prime Minister's legal compliance debated	2019-09-09 00:00:00	2019-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-13-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for making an important point. I know from a recent visit to New College that it takes the mental health of its students very seriously indeed. However, not all young people in my constituency pursue further education through New College. Others choose to do an apprenticeship delivered by a training provider. In the last academic year, 50 students under the age of 19 started an apprenticeship in my constituency. Those apprentices could be training for a career in health and social care, supported by Northern Care Training, an independent provider. They could also be working towards a career as a plumber with South West Durham Training, another independent provider. I was concerned to find out that legal safeguarding duties do not apply to apprentices when their training is delivered by independent providers in the same way as they do for those at an FE college such as New College. While safeguarding requirements are a condition of independent providers’ funding, those providers’ apprentices are not protected by the law in the same way. That is clearly wrong and something must be done about it. It is vital to protect the welfare of our constituents and that is why it is so important that the Bill passes.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-13-commons.u153	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-13	Foy, Mary Kelly	Safeguarding needed for apprentices	2020-03-13 00:00:00	2020-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-commons	Thank you, Mr Speaker, for your courteousness and patience, as always Seventeen million people—one in four of us—are living under additional covid-19 restrictions. That was not inevitable: experts agree that it is linked to the continuing failure to deliver a functioning test, trace and isolate system. That failure has profound economic consequences and puts businesses and jobs at risk. Today, nearly 1 million people are still on furlough in the areas of the country that are subject to local restrictions or are on the watch list Support for local areas has only ever come after restrictions have been imposed—for example, a month later in Leicester’s case. There are leaked suggestions that the Treasury will be involved in decision making around restrictions, potentially to prevent such delays. When will the Government finally be in a position to deliver support hand in hand with the imposition of restrictions, not trailing them The response has been inconsistent: £3 million for Leicester, £7 million for Liverpool city region, an undefined funding package for the north-east of England and nothing for Greater Manchester or the west midlands. What criteria determine the allocation of support to areas under local restrictions? Will they be published? If not, why not? Do they truly reflect the needs of areas subject to restrictions? I note that the Chief Secretary did not talk at any point in his statement about support for areas with economic needs, not health needs. He referred to the local restrictions support grant, but can he confirm that no area currently qualifies for that grant because of current restrictions The millions of people living under local restrictions deserve better. When will the Government grasp the scale of the challenge and act to recover jobs, retrain workers and rebuild businesses?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-commons.u138	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-06	Dodds, Anneliese Jane	Government inconsistent with support allocation	2020-10-06 00:00:00	2020-10-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-lords	My Lords, Wellcome’s head of global policy has described the EU policy as “morally right” because it ensures that the priority will be to spread the use and availability of vaccine across all countries according to need, treating those at the highest risk first. If the Government are not to be part of the EU scheme, will they at least commit to ensuring that vaccine is available to all, across borders, by priority and that they will not simply prioritise UK people? The coronavirus is not a respecter of international borders.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-lords.u105	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-13	Taylor, Matthew Owen John	Global vaccine equity urged	2020-07-13 00:00:00	2020-07-13 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons	I agree with what the Leader of the Opposition said about President Trump. It is time that he re-engaged with the Paris agenda, and dare I say that that would be a good subject for after-dinner conversation? The right hon. Gentleman mentioned leading by example, and he is right that this country must do that even though we play only a small part in the overall global emissions. Should he become Prime Minister, where does he think coal should sit in the balanced energy policy of the future?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons.u227	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-01	Brine, Stephen Charles	Support Paris agenda re-engagement question	2019-05-01 00:00:00	2019-05-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	I was rather enjoying your own speech there, Mr Speaker To finish, I want to underline the humiliation that is the House of Commons turning up at the demand of the EU. I wonder if the 50ps might get melted down tomorrow and turned into something a little more useful. God bless ya. Amendment (a) agreed to. Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House shall sit on Friday 29 March 2019 but that sitting shall not be used for proceedings on consideration of the Overseas Electors Bill.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u711	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	MacNeil, Angus Brendan	House humiliation by EU demands	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-25-commons	My hon. Friend is quite right. He is our trade envoy to the ASEAN region and to a couple of countries there. I was addressing our DIT internal teams in the Asia-Pacific region just this week on the incredible opportunities that this country has there The deal was negotiated almost entirely virtually. It deepens the economic partnership between two like-minded island democracies. It reflects our shared values and our shared belief in the fundamental principles of free and fair trade and the importance of playing by the rules. That point was made on both sides of the House, including by the right hon. Member for Warley (John Spellar) and my right hon. Friend the Member for South West Surrey (Jeremy Hunt). This British-shaped deal strengthens ties between the world’s third largest and fifth largest economies and will help to drive economic growth in the long run. The Government are committed to levelling up the UK, delivering opportunity and unleashing the potential of every part of our United Kingdom. We heard in this debate from two former Trade Ministers: my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox), with his excellent and deep understanding of world trade, and my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on the importance of the International Trade Committee in scrutinising this agreement. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Martin Vickers), who again showed that we have proved the naysayers wrong, and from my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire (Craig Williams) about thriving Wales-Japan trade, particularly in the area of lamb My right hon. Friend the Member for South West Surrey, a former Foreign Secretary, described this as a personal triumph for the Trade Secretary; I entirely agree. I can attest at first hand to how much personal effort she has put into getting the team to move forward, including in the early hours of the day. That has been incredibly helpful. My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Neil Parish), who chairs the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, welcomed the fact that the Trade and Agriculture Commission was to be put on a statutory basis. He also pointed out that Japan is the world’s largest importer of agrifood.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-25-commons.u450	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-25	Hands, Gregory William	ASEAN trade deal deepens ties	2020-11-25 00:00:00	2020-11-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	I will not give way, because time is so short. We know that if there is any disruption to the lorries that keep those car factories going every single day, it will affect the production line. The car industry has had enough bad news in the past two months without it being added to by people standing up saying, “No deal is a jolly good idea. ” A professor from one of our major institutions of higher education, whom I happened to bump into on the underground this morning, said to me that no deal would be “catastrophic” for the institution, its research funding and its ability to recruit staff. The truth is that these conversations are repeated in thousands of workplaces up and down the country, in thousands of sectors of the economy. That is why the twelfth report of the Brexit Select Committee said explicitly that leaving with no deal “cannot constitute the policy of any responsible Government. ” If Members want to read the argument, they can go and look at that report, but I draw attention to the problem faced by a company that makes signs and exports them to Europe to be fitted by its workers. The company asked me what would happen in the event of a no-deal Brexit. I have referred to that in a previous speech. Since then, I asked a written question, to which I received the answer: “UK nationals travelling to the EU for the purposes of work may be subject to extra conditions. Businesses will need to check individual Member State immigration rules for whether there are any requirements or conditions around supporting documentation, work permits or visas. Businesses should also check whether there are any restrictions on the provision of services, such as whether a UK professional qualification is recognised in the country in question. ” What use is that reply to a business that has worked hard to create jobs? There are those in this House who will stand up today and argue that that business’s future should be thrown into doubt, but what use is an answer like that? It basically says, “You’re on your own. ” The final point I want to make is this: given what happened yesterday, today’s vote is the next step required before tomorrow’s inevitable decision to apply for an extension to article 50, which the Brexit Select Committee report—it was published this morning with commendable speed after the events of last night—says will be necessary. Given the rather unhelpful coda, if I may put it that way, to the Government’s motion tonight, I think the House will vote to reject a no-deal Brexit on 29 March this evening, but Ministers need to recognise, be aware of and acknowledge that this House will never vote to leave the European Union without a deal, whether at the end of March, the end of June or the end of October. We are not prepared to take that risk with our economy, our jobs and the livelihoods of the people we represent—not today and not ever.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u511	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Benn, Hilary James	Reject no-deal Brexit	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons	I should explain that, in these exceptional circumstances, although the Chair of the Committee would normally sit in the Clerk’s Chair during Committee stage, in order to comply with social distancing requirements I will remain in the Speaker’s Chair, although I will be carrying out the role not of Deputy Speaker but of Chairman of the Committee. The occupant of the Chair during the Committee should be addressed as the Chair of the Committee, rather than as Deputy Speaker Clause 1 Pavement licences	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons.u319	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-29	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Committee Chair remains in Speaker's Chair	2020-06-29 00:00:00	2020-06-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons	The hon. Lady raises a very interesting point. While I think it would be invidious of me to comment on a particular case, I can see the force of her point. That is quite clearly a very serious assault and there are aggravating features in there, which make it particularly distressing for the worker involved. As I said, a lot of important work is going on with regard to body-worn cameras and we need the roll-out of PAVA spray to help protect prison officers who, let us face it, are doing such an important job that is all too often unheralded.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons.u27	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Buckland, Robert James	Support for body-worn cameras	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	As if by magic—I could almost have scripted that response. SNP Members are shouting out that they won in Scotland, but it was not a Scotland-wide vote; it was a vote by individuals, as is any referendum. It just shows that they have also ignored the 2014 referendum, in which the people of Scotland voted to remain in the United Kingdom, which is the member state of the EU that is leaving the EU. Will the Prime Minister confirm that only the Conservative party, in Scotland and across the United Kingdom, is committed to delivering on both those people’s votes?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u818	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Duguid, David James	Pro-UK unity and Conservative commitment	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons	I commend my hon. Friend and neighbour for securing this important debate for her constituents. The issue she raises applies to many rural constituencies such as mine; the numbers are important. In Melton, 30,000 people in my constituency are served by just one GP practice. [Interruption. ] I respect very much that gasp of awe, which I did not pay for or prearrange. In Oakham, 16,000 people are served by one GP service. Does she agree that if we are truly to be the party of the NHS, we need to invest in primary care, because that is what people feel and experience on the ground that makes them feel that the NHS is truly on their side and we are on their side. It will also get those numbers down, so that people get the fair, honest and decent primary healthcare they deserve.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons.u334	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-25	Kearns, Alicia Alexandra Martha	Rural primary healthcare investment needed	2020-02-25 00:00:00	2020-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	Over the weekend, I watched “The Big Short”, and I would encourage everyone to watch that film about sub-prime mortgages. In it, there were several hedge funders who made billions from the collapse of the market. They did not care that honest, ordinary Americans lost their homes and jobs. When that happens, when we have a no-deal Brexit and hedge-fund managers make billions, how will the Minister support my constituents, who will be impoverished, and will perhaps lose their jobs and homes? What is he going to do to level the playing field? Actually, it is a question of morality.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u31	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Brabin, Tracy Lynn	Brexit impact on constituents' livelihoods	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords	My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord German, for introducing this debate—and for the way he introduced it—and to the Minister for the time he gave some of us on Monday to express our concerns. He will therefore anticipate much of what I will say The Minister made it clear in that meeting that the purpose of this instrument is essentially to help the Government meet their housing targets. I completely appreciate that but, as he will know, I do not think this is the way to do it. In fact, I do not think it will help very much; it will make a marginal difference, as we have heard—possibly 800 homes a year, but probably far less. Of course, none of them will be affordable because it is permitted development This SI will guarantee uncontrolled profits for developers who are looking around at the scale of building in the centre of London, for example, thinking “I want some of the action” and taking opportunities to do just that. It will also damage the prospects and well- being of residents of existing residential blocks of flats who in different ways will be put at serious risk by this The impact statement reflects the imbalance in interests expressed. It reveals the scale of profit potential for developers, which has been estimated by the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership—which is very authoritative—to be between £20 billion and £40 billion. However, it is silent on the costs to the well-being and safety of residents, tenants and leaseholders from these massive interventions to existing buildings. It is also silent on the prospect of huge increases in the cost of enfranchisement, which will follow from the uplift in the value of a freehold. In this case, this policy absolutely cuts against what the Ministry of Justice wants, which is essentially a much simpler, more accessible and cheaper form of enfranchisement. When launching the policy, the Secretary of State was, like other Ministers, silent on this point too. All he referred to was the opportunity for individual families and homes to add a storey. Yes, the policy is presented as one of gentle densification; there is nothing gentle about the impact on residents. I must declare an interest as a resident of a block of flats in London which is already threatened with such an upward extension. We have not been consulted; we do not want it; it is unpredictable and problematic in terms of buildability, safety and loss of amenity. We may well be faced with a choice between living in a building site—ceilings coming down and holes in the walls—or evacuating, and there is no compensation for the loss of peaceful enjoyment There will be resort to law, but only for people who can afford it. The Government knew from the start that this was an unpopular policy, as the noble Lord, Lord German, explained, and many of the issues raised were completely ignored. I suspect the Minister is discomforted by what he has inherited here; will he consider whether anything more can be done to protect residents by way of the planning Bill coming down the track, or can he commit to an early review of the policy rather than waiting the normal five years? Will he also seize the opportunity presented by the Law Commission to accelerate the reforms in leaseholding and look for ways to restrain the colossal prospects of developers? It is an unfair, unbalanced and inefficient policy, but we have a chance to do something about it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords.u180	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Andrews, Elizabeth	Opposition to housing development policy	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-commons	The current scientific advice says that the risks of transmission are far less in the open air than in enclosed spaces. Clearly, the position now should be that the Government need to look at reducing the social distancing rules when people are in the open air, while potentially keeping the advice strong when people are in enclosed spaces. That is clearly important for the hospitality industry, where beer gardens and restaurants with external areas where people can sit outside could restart. Clearly at the moment, with a 2 metre rule in place, they will be unable to. Will my hon. Friend look at the scientific evidence to see if we could actually have two sorts of guidance, one for when people are in enclosed spaces and one for when people are in the open air?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-commons.u167	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-15	Blackman, Robert John	Consider dual distancing guidelines	2020-06-15 00:00:00	2020-06-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons	I am grateful for your advice, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I absolutely do understand your point. I know that you are very sympathetic, and I will hurry up The second key recommendation I want to mention is that Departments should work together to develop a spending review proposal for a fund that would support local authorities in rolling out best practice and innovation in the delivery of the 1,001 critical days services. Thirdly, Departments should work together to ensure that the successor to the troubled families programme has a specific focus on the 1,001 critical days The IMG set out many other recommendations, including investing in maternal and paternal perinatal mental health and ensuring that support is available to address issues in parent-infant relationships. We recommended that the NHS expands access to evidence-based parent-infant psychotherapeutic services within specialist service provision. We also felt that a website should be created to support parents to make informed choices and decisions at key points in their parental journey, including the information that people need about parental leave, childcare support, family-friendly policies and the 1,001 critical days Given that breastfeeding boosts a baby’s ability to fight illness and infection and supports emotional bonding in the early months of life, and given that the UK has one of the lowest rates of breastfeeding in Europe, we also recommended that further action must be taken to continue to focus on reforms that enable and support breastfeeding in England, including the recommendations of the “Becoming Breastfeeding Friendly” review. The IMG made many other recommendations, and I do hope that the Government pick these as soon as possible. One recommendation that I personally made very strongly is that there should be a specific ministerial responsibility for the 1,001 critical days As Members may know, I raised the work of the IMG with the Prime Minister during PMQs earlier this month, and I have tabled several written parliamentary questions to ask what progress has been made on addressing the IMG’s recommendations. I truly believe that we are on the threshold of something very exciting for our country—a real opportunity to deliver long-lasting and positive change in our early years family support policy that would make a huge difference to individuals and society as a whole. I call on the Minister to commit that the Government will report back before the House returns from summer recess, and I ask him to make a statement about that response on the Floor of the House as soon as possible after we return, so that we may debate it further.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons.u322	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-16	Leadsom, Andrea Jacqueline	Proposal for 1,001 critical days	2019-07-16 00:00:00	2019-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons	May I welcome the Prime Minister back to his place and say that it is good to see him back in Parliament? I am sure I speak for all of us when I say that, and although I have done this privately, I congratulate him and Carrie publicly on the birth of their son When the Prime Minister returned to work a week ago Monday, he said that many people were looking at the “apparent success” of the Government’s approach, but yesterday we learned that, tragically, at least 29,427 people in the UK have now lost their lives to this dreadful virus. That is now the highest number in Europe and the second highest in the world. That is not success, or apparent success, so can the Prime Minister tell us: how on earth did it come to this?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-06-commons.u77	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-06	Starmer, Keir	COVID-19 response critique	2020-05-06 00:00:00	2020-05-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons	Reports in the press say that the Prime Minister’s Government are preparing to cut the rate of support under the furlough scheme by a quarter. Can he assure us that this is not the case and that his advice for people to return to work is not an excuse for reduced spending on public health?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-11-commons.u184	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-11	Hendry, Andrew Egan Henderson	Concern over furlough cuts	2020-05-11 00:00:00	2020-05-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her generosity in giving way. She quite rightly points out that this was a Labour initiative. Given the point she just made about trying to move people away from the skies and on to rail, does she recall that the original Arup proposal would have linked HS2 with HS1, so someone could have got on a train in Manchester and got off that same train in Paris? It was Lord Adonis who actually made changes to prevent that from happening and created an environmental catastrophe in counties such as Staffordshire.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons.u223	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-15	Fabricant, Michael Louis David	HS2-HS1 link missed opportunity	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons	Order. Before I call the shadow Secretary of State, colleagues will I hope be aware that this debate finishes at seven minutes past 8, so after the shadow Secretary of State has spoken, I will impose an immediate five-minute time limit, and it will come down after that. If any colleagues feel that their interventions mean they do not need to make further contributions, I am sure other colleagues would appreciate that, and they can let me know and withdraw their names if they wish to.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-commons.u567	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-20	Winterton, Rosalie	Five-minute limit after speech	2019-03-20 00:00:00	2019-03-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords	My Lords, I hope that this will be a fairly brief discussion. Amendment 76 has been tabled to seek clarification about the circumstances in which foreign fishing boats might legitimately enter UK waters without a licence. The kind of circumstances we had envisaged were during a storm, if there is an illness on board or when sailing through UK waters to reach a more distant fishing ground. This topic was raised at a meeting with the Minister last week and we were offered assurances by officials that appropriate international agreements and conventions would trump this Bill in the event of an emergency incident. I hope that the Minister will be able use this opportunity to clarify the conventions, how they would apply in these new circumstances, and the legal advice that he has received in relation to this matter We appreciate that the criminal offence set out in the Bill relates only to fishing in UK waters without a licence, rather than using UK waters for transit or an emergency landing. However, presumably it is not unusual for foreign vessels which are not licensed to enter UK waters to cast their nets as close to the EEZ boundary as possible. If a vessel were to be swept off course by changing weather, could that be construed by a patrol boat as unauthorised fishing I accept that these are hypotheticals, but there are potentially difficult times ahead for policing our waters. We need to recognise that while we will have robust enforcement in our waters, emotions can sometimes run high when it comes to perceived incursions. It is vital that there be a responsible approach which puts safety first, while ensuring that all foreign vessels understand the implications of the licensing regime we are proposing to introduce and do not flout them without recognising the consequences. I therefore beg to move the amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-lords.u181	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-04	Jones, Margaret Beryl	Clarifying foreign fishing boat regulations	2020-03-04 00:00:00	2020-03-04 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons	May I draw the attention of the Home Secretary and the House to an important article just published online in The Independent by the self-described liberal journalist Ahmed Aboudouh, who says that Egypt paid a terrible price in taking back jihadists who begged to be allowed home after the Afghan and Chechen campaigns? He points out that in November 1997, 58 western tourists were slaughtered in Luxor by returned jihadists who only a year earlier had been begging to come back. Clearly, there is a danger in letting radicalised people come back. However, given that not everyone can have their citizenship withdrawn and not everyone who has been out there can be successfully prosecuted because of the lack of evidence of what goes on in a place like that, does the solution not have to be a change in the law so that the act of giving support, aid and comfort to terrorist groups is itself a prosecutable offence?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-20-commons.u252	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-20	Lewis, Julian Murray	Change law to prosecute terrorism	2019-02-20 00:00:00	2019-02-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons	I would like to say, Mr Speaker, what a pleasure it has been to serve under your speakership during my time in Parliament Recently, I went out with members of the National Farmers’ Union in my constituency and was horrified to discover a spate of fly-tipping of very dubious materials that then need to be checked by the landowner. The landowner has a responsibility to check out the hazardous nature of the materials and then to dispose of them safely. This is putting much additional pressure on farmers and rural communities. What can the Government do to support those rural communities and the police forces who continue to be under significant pressure to address this spate of fly-tipping?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons.u75	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-31	Dakin, Nicholas	Fly-tipping concerns in constituency	2019-10-31 00:00:00	2019-10-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	The hon. Gentleman makes a very reasonable point, and I shall endeavour to find out what can be done to help hon. Members. I assure him and the House that whatever can be done will be done to expedite these processes and to make it easier for hon. Members to become conversant with exactly what will happen tomorrow and on subsequent days.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u508	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Commitment to expedite processes	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-14-commons	There was obviously a vigorous referendum campaign. As I said earlier, I believe that when people voted, they voted to take back control of money, laws and borders. That is what this deal delivers, alongside the other things that people were concerned about, such as leaving the CAP and the CFP and having an independent trade policy.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-14-commons.u382	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-14	May, Theresa Mary	Brexit deal delivers control back	2019-01-14 00:00:00	2019-01-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-17-commons	Although I did not make a speech in this debate, I enjoyed the others greatly and I did make a short intervention. Will my hon. Friend take back to the Government the dangers of allowing free rein to graft extra top floors on to high-rise blocks with limited planning requirements? I have personal experience, as I said, and it is a disaster in the making. We should not be encouraging it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-17-commons.u420	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-17	Lewis, Julian Murray	Oppose high-rise extensions risks	2020-12-17 00:00:00	2020-12-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-commons	Should we not be looking at the underlying proposition, given the enormous increase in renewables? Is it not absurd that we have been importing electricity through the interconnector while paying renewable companies, particularly those connected to wind farms but also to solar, to switch off because of low levels of demand? Is there not a disconnect in this market at the moment?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-15-commons.u297	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-15	Spellar, John Francis	Renewable energy market inefficiencies	2020-06-15 00:00:00	2020-06-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-02-lords	My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, for securing this timely climate change debate today. It is an opportunity for us all to focus on and support a strong, determined, non-political pathway for change. As public concern about climate change has increased to levels we have never witnessed before, that concern must be addressed. Climate change has moved to the top of the political agenda, resulting in an urgent need to instigate more decisive action for future generations. Yesterday, the other House acknowledged the climate change plan, which could make Britain the first major economy to reduce its carbon footprint to zero. That is a dramatic change from the current target of a reduction of 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels The UK has become the biggest user of offshore wind energy farms. They have grown up in a relatively short number of years as costs have fallen significantly, with further enhancement to develop the so-called carbon capture utilisation and storage facilities. To continue reducing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and help to drive net emissions to zero, the UK needs to build a number of CCUS plants to hold those millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Prescott, that the Humber region is host to one of the UK’s biggest on and offshore wind farms in the UK On the face of it, we have a colossal amount to do. The people expect more in the agenda of addressing change. We need to tackle the growing environmental crisis now, because the longer we delay, the harder it will be. Last year, 6.8 tonnes of greenhouse gases were emitted into the atmosphere per head of the UK population, so we must look at the mechanism to bring that down to zero. Everything must be included in the mix for those massive future changes: transport, retrofitting of housing, replacing boilers with heat pumps, and major changes in food production, to name a few. As climate change takes hold, we are now seeing increasing storms, rising sea levels, disappearing coral reefs, catastrophic flooding and ice caps melting. Current temperatures are on course to rise by 3 degrees centigrade, leading to devastating heatwaves and raising the risk of large-scale, irreversible impacts. Five years ago, nearly 63% of UK electricity was generated by coal or oil, compared to 15% by renewables. Last year, the equation had changed from 63% fossil fuels to 44%, and the proportion for renewables had risen from 15% to nearly 32%. That is a good marker, and 2018 was the greenest and cleanest year I mentioned food production. Management practice must improve in agriculture, helping to reduce carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, which will have an impact on future diet requirements and the costs associated. We have also seen a loss of crop yields, wildlife and wetlands. Our countryside has a large part to play in climate change, and we must use it to the best advantage: for example, by freeing up land to plant trees, and looking to increase forest cover from 13% to 17%. Miles of hedgerows have been pulled out, so we need those reinstated. Shrubs can absorb carbon dioxide, as well as enhancing the environment. Nature is waiting. What is the latest number of tree-planting schemes started, completed or in the pipeline I am pleased that the UK is leading by example in reducing annual emissions by more than 43% since 1990, but much more is needed. Time is of the essence. As my noble friend Lord Deben said, we cannot hang about too long; we must get a move on to reach the goal of a zero-emission target, enabling our future economy to be cleaner, smarter and more efficient for our future generations As we say, we are all in this together: people young and old want to play some part in driving that challenge for change, and in recent days we have seen a call for action. There is no doubt that climate change is the most profound environmental challenge facing the world today. We have a target date for net zero of 2050, but we must have well-designed policies to reach that goal, and climate change must be placed at the heart of our economic agenda.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-02-lords.u101	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-02	Redfern, Elizabeth	Urgent action on climate change	2019-05-02 00:00:00	2019-05-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords	My Lords, I am pleased to speak today very briefly. I have known the noble Baroness, Lady Cumberlege, for years since I worked in the health scene myself. She is widely experienced, and no one could have done a better report. It is very impressive and certainly not to be ignored. The various points that she has made, including the nine major recommendations, are all sound and people are very aware of them. We must realise that, though the health service is much loved by everyone in the country, there are failings which we have to accept and work on. I congratulate the noble Baroness on this marvellous report and hope that, as she urged in her press conference: “This report must not be left on a shelf to gather dust. ” I am pleased to commend the report and the remarks passed.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords.u219	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Gardner, Rachel Trixie Anne	Praise for Lady Cumberlege's report	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-commons	It is all very well the Minister referring to attending meetings and summits, but police bosses this week demanded an extra 10,000 police officers to deal with this absolutely dreadful problem. More children may well die this weekend. If the Government refuse to provide the 10,000 extra officers that the police bosses demand, it prompts the question: what price do this Government attach to a child’s life?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-07-commons.u225	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-07	Sherriff, Paula Michelle	Demand for more police officers	2019-03-07 00:00:00	2019-03-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	These exchanges reflect the views that I am certain we all hold, and I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising all those questions. The culture and behaviour shown on yesterday’s television programme are absolutely abhorrent and we must stamp them out. More broadly, it is clear from the reports published earlier this week, which the right hon. Gentleman refers to, that we need to do much more to improve the quality of care in mental health wards for anyone with a learning disability or autism. I want to reassure the House that we absolutely recognise that, and steps are being taken to address it Societies are rightly judged on the way we treat our most vulnerable citizens. This is not just about reviewing a few individual cases in which things went wrong; it is about a system across health, education, social care and criminal justice—it all needs to change. Today, people will rightly be very angry about what has happened and what was shown on last night’s television programme, and they will want answers. They will also rightly be very angry that, eight years after Winterbourne View, we have another scandalous case in which vulnerable people with learning disabilities or autism are on the receiving end. They will rightly ask what action has been taken and what more we need to do As the right hon. Gentleman will know, six months ago the Secretary of State commissioned the CQC report on segregation, seclusion and restrictive practices. It was published earlier this week simply because the original publication due date of 31 May is during a recess, and he will know that the Department has come in for enormous criticism in the past for publishing reports when Parliament is in recess, post elections or when the House is not sitting and for publishing late. We wanted to avoid all those things. That is why the date was brought forward. The publication was ready and we took the view to publish it. The publication of the LeDeR report was a matter for NHS England, of course, it being an independent document The action we announced in response to the CQC report on Tuesday confirms how seriously we take this issue. We are adamant that no stone should be left unturned in identifying problems, poor practice and care that falls short of what we would expect for our own family members. That said, this is not about segregation or seclusion or failings at specific hospitals, but about the need for far better oversight more generally. Where it is essential that somebody be supported at a distance from their home, we will make sure that those arrangements are supervised. We will not tolerate having people out of sight and out of mind. Where someone with a learning disability or an autistic person has to be an in-patient out of area, they will now be visited on site every six weeks if they are a child and every eight weeks if they are an adult The host clinical commissioning group will also be given new responsibilities to oversee and monitor the quality of care provided in their area. This is an issue not just for the regulator, but for those who commission the care. We must be clear that improving the quality of specialist in-patient care is critical, but we are committed to preventing people from entering crisis and having to be admitted to in-patient care in the first place, and that is what the transforming care programme is about. This programme has not finished. As was highlighted in the NHS long-term plan, the transforming care programme and the building the right support plan continue, and we are renewing and redoubling efforts to reduce the number of people in an in-patient setting by 35%. So far, it is down 22% from 2015, but that endeavour continues. The right hon. Gentleman highlights the report from the Children’s Commissioner on Monday. We take the issues they spoke about very seriously The right hon. Gentleman asked lots of questions, many of which I think were answered in the three questions I highlighted earlier—the questions that we will be addressing over the coming weeks: criminal liability, oversight and commissioning. Where there have been failings, these will be addressed. Autistic children often have a range of needs or supports that must be joined up, which is why we are reviewing our entire autism strategy and will extend it to include children. As part of the NHS long-term plan, there will be a concerted effort to implement arrangements to ensure that those at the highest risk of admission to a specialist hospital get the help they need, and we will ensure that every area has a dynamic support register in place We think that staff in these settings must be much better trained in awareness of learning disabilities and autism, which is why we conducted a thorough inquiry and public consultation on training for learning disabilities and autism. In the coming months, we will set out our response to that consultation and proposals to introduce mandatory training for all health and care staff. We will continue to bring those in-patient numbers down and take every step to take the best practice in health and care and make it the norm everywhere. We will root out toxic cultures and behaviours of the type we saw last night so very painfully on our television screens, but I am fully aware that there is no room for complacency.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u150	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Dinenage, Caroline Julia	Improve care for vulnerable citizens	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-13-commons	Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the data also shows that the tracing rates for local authority or regional public health teams are somewhere between 90% and 100%, whereas the central contact tracing percentage is only somewhere in the 60s? That is more evidence that we should be running this locally.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-13-commons.u302	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-13	Wilson, Munira	Support local contact tracing	2020-10-13 00:00:00	2020-10-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-09-commons	The recent treatment of the 19-year-old British national in Ayia Napa and the failures of the judicial process follow on from the failure of the judicial system in Cyprus to bring to justice the killers of my constituent George Low, who was murdered in the same town in 2016. Can we please have a debate on the safety of British subjects visiting Cyprus on holiday and whether any further precautions or advice are needed?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-09-commons.u265	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-09	Johnson, Gareth Alan	Concerns about British tourists' safety	2020-01-09 00:00:00	2020-01-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-20-commons	As a stunning coastal destination built on hospitality and tourism sectors hard hit by the impact of the virus, Eastbourne is none the less looking to bounce back when it is safe to do so and is part of work on a covid-secure kitemark to inspire public confidence. Does my right hon. Friend see merit in this, and when the coast is clear, will he visit?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-20-commons.u103	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-20	Ansell, Caroline	Boosting tourism post-COVID lockdown	2020-05-20 00:00:00	2020-05-20 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-11-lords	—in tree-dappled sunlight on their own network of fully segregated cycle lanes, as we did in London This Government will deliver a new anatomy of British transport—a revolution in this nation’s public transport provision and a sign to the world that, in the 21st century, this United Kingdom still has the vision to dream big dreams and the courage to bring those dreams about. I commend this Statement to the House. ” [Applause. ]	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-11-lords.u58	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-11	Vere, Charlotte	Revolutionize UK public transport	2020-02-11 00:00:00	2020-02-11 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons	The right hon. and learned Gentleman has referred to spending a lot of his time standing at borders. When he was at the border in Northern Ireland, was he able to see the complete and total complexity of that border, with the hundreds of crossing points, and has he grasped the total impossibility of anyone anywhere constructing a hard border that could not be avoided with ease?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons.u366	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Campbell, Gregory Lloyd	Border complexity hard to enforce	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-10-commons	As we all know, nurses, midwives, paramedics and physiotherapists are highly skilled roles, and the Government have been clear that they meet the immigration skills threshold. What steps is the Department taking to dispel the level of fake news on the subject, and to encourage the brightest and best from around the world to apply for these important roles?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-10-commons.u53	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-10	Jupp, Simon James	Attract skilled healthcare professionals	2020-03-10 00:00:00	2020-03-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-06-commons	It strikes me, as an MP who is still fairly new in this place, that the attitude is often, “It’s only Northern Ireland, so we can whizz it through in a day. ” It should not be right for any Bill to pass Second Reading, Committee and Third Reading in one day without any suitable scrutiny.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-06-commons.u343	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-06	Caulfield, Maria Colette	Northern Ireland bill rushed	2019-03-06 00:00:00	2019-03-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	On 19 August, I tabled a question asking the Minister to publish his no-deal planning, so I am very grateful for his invitation to MPs to attend his Department to view that. On 9 September, I received an answer to that question saying that due to Prorogation it was not possible to respond. I have also asked that the up-to-date Yellowhammer document be published and that each version of it be published. The written answer to that question was the same—that due to Prorogation it was not possible to respond. Will he now commit to publishing the various versions of Yellowhammer?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u461	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Sherratt (Sandbach), Antoinette Geraldine	Publish Yellowhammer versions now	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON;I	Conservative;Independent	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	Does the Leader of the House agree that it is a bit rich for Members of this House who voted for the emergency procedure to be used for the surrender Bill to pass it in a day to now say, “Oh, but we need more time to discuss this deal. ” ? They like it when it suits them, and they do not like it when it does not. They are trying to subvert democracy and the democratic will of the British people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u382	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Elphicke, Brett Charles Anthony	Hypocrisy in parliamentary procedures	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-14-commons	I am sure the hon. Gentleman will be the first to acknowledge—the point has already been made—that, sadly, one of the results has been that many people who are in receipt of this pension scheme, including the hon. Member for Blyth Valley (Mr Campbell), who was in his place, no longer live in those coalfield communities, but they have benefited as pensioners from many of the other pension benefits that that income has gone towards providing I met, and was incredibly impressed with the trustees. Relative to other schemes, the results they have provided and the compassion and generosity with which they administer the scheme are second to none, and we should pay tribute to them for that. I point out again that the returns from the Government underwriting of the scheme are about a third higher in real terms than they would have been I want to turn to something that has been suggested by the trustees. When I met them—and perhaps the hon. Member for Barnsley East and I should meet them together to have the same conversation; I will be happy to do that—they indicated to me that they understood that changing the surplus sharing arrangements, as was considered by the last Labour Government and rejected, was not the biggest priority. The biggest priority was protecting the accrued bonuses and making sure that the scheme could proceed on that basis. They have come forward with some excellent proposals and I commend them for that. I had a brief discussion this evening with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor about my interest and the Treasury’s interest in properly reviewing those proposals and taking them forward. I am very happy to have those conversations face to face, as I have committed to do I genuinely admire the hon. Lady’s speech. It is brilliant to see her and so many colleagues standing up for a group of people who many may argue gave more to the system than they received from it. As a family member, I am proud to acknowledge that and to stand up as the steward of the scheme and pledge to her that I will do my best to ensure that it continues to deliver I do want to say that the trustees’ proposals are excellent, albeit we need to look at the cash flow implications. We will continue to explore options and I am very happy to do that on a cross-party basis with all Members who would be interested in doing so Question put and agreed to.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-14-commons.u716	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-14	Perry, Claire Louise	Praise for pension trustees proposals	2019-02-14 00:00:00	2019-02-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons	I am not a prophet, so I would not dream of predicting those sorts of things. I have taken lots of interventions. In some ways I think this is a beneficial; it partly illustrates my argument about why Parliament needs to get back, and I appreciate that in a short debate interventions are sometimes just as useful for Members to be able to get in as getting half a minute at the end. If there are interventions, I will, by the leave of the House, carry on taking them Every Division is important, and I would underline that. We should be confident that we are all individually doing the right thing and voting openly under the eyes of others; voting while enjoying a sunny walk or watching television does democracy an injustice. The solemn decisions we take together affect the lives of millions of people in this country. We ask Members to vote in person for a reason: because it is the heart of what Parliament is about It remains essential that our work in this House is carried out in line with Public Health England advice. The Palace of Westminster we have returned to today is greatly changed from early March. The House authorities have carried out a risk assessment of the parliamentary estate to ensure it is a covid-19 secure workplace, in line with PHE guidance. Both its staff and its leadership, including particularly Mr Speaker, should be thanked and congratulated for the rapid progress that has been made I understand the concerns of some hon. and right hon. Members about returning physically. Many Members have already passed on their views, but I want to make it clear to all those in the House, and those who are not here but are listening and maybe shielding at home, that I am always available to discuss and hear their concerns, and I will as far as possible—which is why I will be bringing forward the motion tomorrow—do what I can to help. It will be tabled today for approval tomorrow. Anyone who feels that they are required to shield because of age or medical circumstances should not feel under pressure to attend Parliament, and pairing and other mechanisms will be in place informally to facilitate this.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons.u230	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-02	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	In-person parliamentary voting is essential	2020-06-02 00:00:00	2020-06-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons	Defence is supporting the Government’s campaign against covid-19 disinformation, specifically to counter disinformation, misinformation and malign information from abroad. The Government are also working closely with social media platforms, academia and civil society to tackle this issue, although I stress that this is not a role undertaken by our military personnel. The Government’s particular focus remains on promoting factual public health advice and countering inaccurate content.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-commons.u95	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Wallace, Robert Ben Lobban	Defence combats covid-19 disinformation	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons	Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the comments emerging from Speaker Pelosi and others in the United States stressing that if there is any breach of the protocol in the withdrawal agreement—a threat to the Good Friday agreement—there will be no prospect of a trade deal with the United States? Is that not the fundamental flaw in the analysis of those pursuing a hard Brexit?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-commons.u250	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-16	Farry, Stephen Anthony	No US trade deal risk	2020-09-16 00:00:00	2020-09-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	A	Alliance	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords	The noble Baroness is right; we face a very uncertain few months and we do not honestly know how businesses will react as we come out of furlough and lockdown. We are looking at the long-term implications. The early indications are that there is optimism. While I think that an inverted-V bounce is probably too optimistic, I think a lot restricted spending will be unleashed into the economy. It is worth remembering that under the furlough arrangement employees are receiving 80% of their normal earnings without the cost of commuting or eating out in cafes or whatever when they are working. I stress that we are looking at all future scenarios.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords.u153	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-28	Agnew, Theodore	Economic optimism despite uncertainty	2020-04-28 00:00:00	2020-04-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords	The noble Lord is correct to ask about the parameters. I cannot say with accuracy what the exact numbers are. I am aware of how many emails I have received—that number is 75—but I suspect that there are many more. I am not sure whether we are all copied into the same 75, so there may be considerably more even within this round, but there are a significant number. There will be those whose participation in the scheme is not subject to the various issues which we are taking forward today because they are functionally comfortable within the returns that they have been able to expect, but there will be those—the 75 may be a reflection of that figure, but it could be higher—who find themselves in the invidious and unpleasant position of being in financial constraint and hardship as a consequence of simply being faithful to the guidance given by Ministers and civil servants in Northern Ireland. It is to those we must turn our attention As many noble Lords will be aware, the scheme was such that there will no doubt be participants who have sought to benefit from a remarkably generous scheme. To those, the notion of hardship will not necessarily apply in the way that it does to those who have written to us setting out in some detail the pain and disaster they face as a consequence of this situation. I hope that there will be adequate time for this. We need to ensure that we move in a more appropriate fashion; we cannot allow this to be delayed.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-19-lords.u135	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-19	Duncan, Ian	Increase scheme attention move appropriately	2019-03-19 00:00:00	2019-03-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-13-commons	Local lockdowns will undoubtedly affect small businesses that have already struggled due to the initial lockdown earlier this year. In my constituency, traders at Chrisp Street market and Watney market were impacted by the lack of Government support earlier in the year. Some of those traders operate from rented lock-ups, where their goods are stored, and business rates for those properties are paid for by the leaseholder, meaning that market traders did not benefit from business rates relief and therefore suffered financial hardship. May I ask the Chief Secretary to the Treasury what further financial support can be provided for those local businesses that are not covered by business rates relief in the event of a local lockdown?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-13-commons.u204	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-13	Begum, Apsana	Support local businesses in lockdown	2020-10-13 00:00:00	2020-10-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords	My Lords, we welcome these orders and the comprehensive way in which the noble and learned Lord has opened this debate. As we have heard, the order under the Police Act changes the arrangements for disclosure by the Disclosure and Barring Service The first change removes youth cautions and reprimands and warnings given to persons under 18 from the disclosure requirement. This is obviously sensible and necessary. The whole point of youth cautions has been to enable the police to deal with children and young people informally, without criminal prosecution. The disclosure requirement is therefore an anomaly. Secondly, the removal of the multiple conviction rule eliminates another anomaly. The effect of a second conviction, of whatever nature, has hitherto been to open up disclosure of all previous convictions, again of whatever nature The order under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act achieves the same two effects in respect of disclosure by applicants for employment to potential employers—again, obviously sensible and desirable. But these two orders are laid not because the Government suddenly realised that the existing provisions were unwise, unfair and unlawful but because of the Supreme Court’s decision last year in the four cases of P and others, as the noble and learned Lord acknowledged. The unfairness of the existing law is illustrated by the facts of those cases, which I hope I will be forgiven for summarising In 1996 Mrs G was fined £35 in all for seat-belt offences, then in 1998 a further £80 for similar offences. She has no other convictions. In 2014, 16 years later, now a qualified care worker, she applied for a job at a day centre for adults with learning disabilities, but her disclosure of her historical convictions was incomplete and her job offer was withdrawn after the enhanced criminal record certificate disclosed all her previous convictions In 1999 P was cautioned for stealing a sandwich from a shop and conditionally discharged for stealing a book worth 99p and failing to surrender to bail. She was then 28, homeless and suffering from mental illness. She has committed no further offences. Now a qualified teaching assistant, she has not been able to find employment, she believes as a result of her disclosure obligations In 1982 W, aged 16, received a conditional discharge for an assault during a fight with other boys. In 2013, aged 47, he began a course in teaching English to adults. He believed his chances of obtaining teaching employment would be prejudiced by the need to obtain a criminal record certificate Finally, in 2006 G, aged 13, was arrested for two trivial offences of sexual assault on two younger boys. The police accepted that the offences were consensual and in the form of dares. He was reprimanded by police and has not offended since. In 2011 he was required to apply for an enhanced criminal record check because his work as a library assistant involved contact with children. As a result, he withdrew the application and lost his job The Supreme Court judges decided unanimously, though their reasons differed slightly, that the existing provisions infringed the applicants’ Article 8 rights to privacy. This case has powerful support for two pillars of our liberty. The first is the European Convention on Human Rights, which in recent years has been frequently under attack. The second is the right of citizens to apply for judicial review in respect of claims that their human rights have been breached. That right too remains under attack The Government and their supporters are often heard to complain of judicial activism and lawyers whom some would describe as activist lawyers overruling the supremacy of Parliament, but we should not forget that the Police Act and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and the orders made under them were passed by our sovereign Parliament. Nor should we forget that these judicial review cases were pursued by the Government, opposing the applicants all the way through the courts to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, notwithstanding a decisive finding at a lower level that the existing provisions were incompatible with the applicants’ Article 8 rights In the context of discussions on legal aid, we should also note that P did not have a solicitor and was represented by Liberty; nor did G, who was represented by a non-profit organisation called Just for Kids Law This debate reminds us of the need for judicial and extraterritorial checks on parliamentary sovereignty and the importance of constant vigilance.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords.u200	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Marks, Jonathan	Support Amendment to Disclosure Laws	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons	I thank my right hon. Friend for his intervention. I cannot give him a scientific answer, but I can tell him that the evidence the all-party group received from those people who have been through FGM absolutely concurs with what he has just said: there are parts of the establishment and social services, and people within the education system, who are very nervous indeed about pointing the finger on FGM. There is a concern about trampling on cultural sensitivities. The view of the people we talked to, like my view and, I suspect, that of many in the House today, is that those sensitivities should be pushed to one side. This is a very direct form of child abuse; child abuse is child abuse, and it is our responsibility as adults and the authorities to stamp it out at every opportunity. That message has been unambiguous, in all the evidence we have taken from those people who have been through FGM.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons.u453	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Goldsmith, Zac	Cultural sensitivities hinder FGM action	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-19-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Reigate (Crispin Blunt). I hope to be working with him over the course of this Parliament to help to reform our drug laws, along with my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Jeff Smith), whom he so kindly mentioned The people of Bristol West did not vote for this Government or this Queen’s Speech. I have read the detailed briefing as well as the speech. There is a lot in there, but unfortunately there are things missing in the detail and other things missing entirely that the people of Bristol West will want me to mention. They wanted a Government whose programme treats the climate emergency as a clear and present danger needing urgent action so as to be carbon neutral by 2030, not 2050. They wanted our schools and early years provision to be properly funded—and they do know the difference between a cash rise and a real-terms rise. They want the global refugee and forced migration crisis dealt with, but the immigration system mentioned in the Queen’s Speech does not address refugees at all. They know that homelessness is not going to be solved by the warm words in the speech, but needs action. They know the importance of science and research, whether in dealing with antimicrobial resistance or getting tidal wave and wind to be more efficient and economically viable so that we can get to our carbon-neutral targets The people of Bristol West wanted an approach to drug policy that, as the hon. Member for Reigate said, focuses on harm reduction, saving lives, protecting victims and tackling exploitative gangs, but also provides protection for the neighbours of people involved in drug misuse or drug dealing. They want a country that values equality and human rights, and they want that to be shown in how we treat adults and schoolchildren with autism, special educational needs and disabilities.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-12-19-commons.u131	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-12-19	Debbonaire, Thangam Elizabeth Rachel	Bristol West's unmet governmental needs	2019-12-19 00:00:00	2019-12-19 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-lords	The noble Lord expresses a concern, shared by us all, about exacerbating the situation of not just those Daesh fighters but the families who were held. I assure him that I am in receipt of his email, which he referred to, and that we are looking at each case very closely. Where people are identified as due for prosecution—for example, if they arrive back in the UK—it will be for the Crown Prosecution Service to look at each matter individually, and appropriate action will be taken against those who committed these crimes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-lords.u16	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-15	Ahmad, Tariq	Concern over prosecuting Daesh affiliates	2019-10-15 00:00:00	2019-10-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-07-lords	My Lords, I should first declare that I have served two separate terms as a trustee of Kew, the second as chairman The Minister has explained how the Crown Lands Act 1702 prevents Kew granting leases of more than 31 years. It is not often that we delve so far back in history, and I should like to put this desirable Bill into a further historical context. It was Sir Joseph Banks in the 18th century who did most to set Kew Gardens on its way to becoming an important scientific establishment. However, after his death, and for many years in the mid-19th century, there were fierce rows between the directors—first, Sir William Hooker and then his son Sir Joseph Hooker—and their political boss, the first Commissioner of Works The row was about whether Kew’s role was essentially as a botanic garden and scientific institution or whether it was to be a public park. The row got so fierce that eventually Prime Minister Gladstone had to intervene; wisely, he went with Sir Joseph Hooker. By 1900, the Royal Botanic Gardens were transferred from the Commissioner for Works to the Board of Agriculture, as MAFF—now Defra—was then known. Kew’s role in botanical investigations, taxonomy, plant sciences and, not least, economic botany, were promoted to underpin government policies, as well as to support farmers and horticulturists. As the Minister explained, Defra continues that legacy of looking to Kew for scientific underpinning on policy issues The National Heritage Act 1983 transferred direct responsibility for Kew Gardens from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to a board of 12 trustees. The first chairman was my noble friend Lord Eccles. I suspect that the director at the time found the imposition of a trust board more onerous than the occasional meetings held with Ministers and officials previously. From 1 April 1984, when the Act came into force, the funding from government sources as a percentage of total spend started, frankly, to decline. This is partly because the role of Kew has expanded as it becomes ever more relevant. Not only does the quality of the science itself attract increased expenditure and, one hopes, increased funding, but its international importance has also increased and continues to do so. One has only to read the report from the United Nations that came out this weekend to note that biodiversity will at last be on the G8 agenda. Botanic gardens around the world, not least Kew, will have an important contribution to make I must, in all fairness, confess to mission creep. I remember when the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, was the Defra Minister responsible for Kew and I was chairing the trust, he gently rapped me over the knuckles for taking on yet more commitments. This was over the mycology collection, which was going to be lost—something we felt could not be tolerated. Of course, there was no funding for it so we had to commit ourselves to raising the money. I always recognised that the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, was quite right to draw attention to the commitments that we were making This week we hear about the United Nations report on global threats to biodiversity. To meet the increased need to broaden the funding of Kew, a foundation was set up in 1990 as a charity with the sole object of raising funds for projects not covered by grant aid or self-generated money. We heard from the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, about how far the envelope has been pushed on admissions. I recognise her point about how difficult it is to attract people from different ethnic backgrounds when there is such a need for self-generated money The Kew Foundation remains highly successful in raising funding, particularly for key buildings and core projects but, inevitably, as we heard from the Minister, some buildings in need of repair cannot be described as core buildings. Considerable sums of money will be needed to maintain them adequately. A wider range of commercial options including, for example, long leases, would reduce maintenance liabilities and running costs while in no way impacting on this UNESCO world heritage site. The case has been made clearly by previous speakers, so I need do no more than say that the Bill will be of great assistance to Kew and that I give it my full support.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-07-lords.u65	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-07	Palmer, John	Support for Kew Gardens Bill	2019-05-07 00:00:00	2019-05-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords	My Lords, my contribution to this debate will be brief, partly because I have already expressed my views on many occasions, and in part because, if I speak at any length, my anger, shame and distress at what my party is doing to this country and to itself will become too apparent. All I can say in Mr Johnson’s favour is that his policies are somewhat less destructive than those advocated by Mr Corbyn and his immediate circle. I recognise that that is a lukewarm endorsement I support the Motion. Indeed, I cannot see any rational reason for opposing it, certainly not the procedural reasons that I suspect the Minister will advance, nor even the sophisticated arguments of my noble friend Lord Bridges, with whom I normally agree, or the less sophisticated arguments advanced by my noble friend Lord Robathan. No-deal Brexit is not yet government policy, so the Motion reflects—indeed, underpins—government strategy. The Motion provides for a Joint Committee of both Houses, long called for by my neighbour and noble friend Lord Cormack. It implies the taking and consideration of external and independent evidence, doubtless to address the very questions identified by the noble Lords, Lord Anderson and Lord Paddick. That is highly desirable A report from such a source would ensure that, at a critical moment—one certain to arise—the public would be better informed about the consequences of a no-deal Brexit, which is precisely what my noble friend Lord Bridges called for, and I wholly agree. Surely, the existence of a better-informed public is a necessary condition to taking back control. Incidentally, this Joint Committee could examine what I fear is the somewhat optimistic analysis of my noble friend Lord Howell of Guildford. I normally agree with him, but I should like to know what external experts have to say about it To move away from the somewhat narrow terms of the Motion, I conclude with the following observations. I regard the whole policy of Brexit as an extraordinary act of national self-harm—political, economic, cultural and diplomatic—and one that will threaten the very unity of the United Kingdom, so eloquently spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Reid. It is entirely unsupported by plausible assumptions or credible evidence. It is being driven by obsessions of a largely absurd and harmful kind. I do not accept that the referendum of 2016 provides any democratic authority for crashing out without a deal. In 2016, the electorate was assured that Brexit would be a smooth, orderly process providing for seamless trade. That is not what will happen if a no-deal Brexit occurs. As the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, made wholly plain in a masterly analysis, now that the relevant facts are so much clearer, there would be nothing undemocratic about a further referendum. Indeed, such a referendum is now probably a necessary precondition to the revocation of Article 50, which is what I think we should now do. There is evidence from the polls of a shift in public opinion. Moreover, after three years, a new and large cohort of young voters is now enfranchised, and it is surely right that their views on their future should be taken into account Finally, any suggestion that Parliament should be prorogued to prevent elected Members of Parliament challenging or overruling the decisions of Ministers would be a constitutional outrage. Such a policy must be resisted by every possible proper means, including, if necessary, a Motion of no confidence. While to support such a Motion would certainly risk possible disaster, it might avert certain disaster. Those who bring forward or participate in a policy of prorogation for the purpose identified will bring lasting shame on themselves and the party to which they belong. It would almost certainly lead to their political destruction and it would subvert the basic principles on which parliamentary government rests. I am going to vote for the Motion.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords.u78	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Hogg, Douglas	Support for Motion against Brexit	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. This year is a chance to celebrate the legacy of great nurses and midwives of the past such as Florence Nightingale, notably, but also great figures such as Mary Seacole and others in this country and elsewhere. It is also a chance to celebrate today’s nurses and midwives, and thank them for what they do. In passing, I am delighted to be wearing a piece of the new nursing tartan, designed by Scottish nurses and commissioned just last month. However, this is also an opportunity to look again at nursing and midwifery, recognising how far the professions have developed in recent years and that they perform a very wide range of roles, all with customary care and compassion Nurses are true health professionals in their own right, no longer handmaidens to doctors—if they ever were—and have the potential in the future to do even more. With that in mind, I ask the Minister two questions. First, what plans do the Government have for investing in training and increasing the numbers of advanced nurse practitioners? Secondly, what plans do they have for reversing the decline in community nurses, school nurses and health visitors in this country, who will play such a vital role as services move more towards the community?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-30-lords.u17	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-30	Crisp, Edmund	Celebrate and support nurses' roles	2020-01-30 00:00:00	2020-01-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons	Hopefully it will benefit today from the significant measures that have been put in place to provide forward business rate relief and immediate cash support through grants. That should provide the business with some reassurance that help is on its way to enable it to protect jobs, with more to come.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons.u557	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Sunak, Rishi	Business rate relief grants instituted	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-commons	The groups the hon. Gentleman has mentioned are to be commended. I have come across young people who help those with dementia—there is an interesting project in Coventry—and people who are blind. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will agree that we can do more to reinstate youth clubs, which played a vital role in the past. Does he agree that the Government should have another look at that, because that might offer a way forward in addressing knife crime for example?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-08-commons.u368	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-08	Cunningham, James Dolan	Commend youth support initiatives	2019-05-08 00:00:00	2019-05-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons	I welcome the landmark £24 billion investment in our UK armed forces, as announced by the Prime Minister just last month, bringing economic and security benefits to all four nations of our great United Kingdom. Does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State agree, therefore, that this demonstrates the true value of the Union to Scotland, bringing jobs to Scotland, enhancing the security of the nation, and delivering on the Prime Minister’s levelling-up agenda across the country?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons.u16	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-09	Longhi, Marco	Investment strengthens UK union	2020-12-09 00:00:00	2020-12-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons	A whisper may have reached the Home Secretary that my hon. Friend the Member for South Leicestershire (Alberto Costa) is going to propose an amendment on Wednesday calling for a joint UK-EU commitment to adopt part two of the draft withdrawal agreement as soon as possible. May I invite the Home Secretary to indicate, for the very reasons he has just set out, that the Government are supportive of that position?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons.u43	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Morgan, Nicky	UK-EU withdrawal agreement amendment support	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-lords	My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord has raised this important issue, and that he referred to the views expressed by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. As she said yesterday, the language used to refer to these women was completely unacceptable. I am also glad that the two contenders for the leadership of my party have spoken in similar terms. My right honourable friend will always stand up for the values of tolerance, decency and respect.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-lords.u37	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-16	Stopford, James	Support for tolerance and respect	2019-07-16 00:00:00	2019-07-16 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-commons	The right hon. Member for Forest of Dean (Mr Harper) is absolutely right to say that this Government have not provided the information the House requires to make a balanced judgment about the right thing to do on these regulations. I cannot vote for these regulations. My constituents are sick and tired of how they are being treated by the Prime Minister and the Government. The Government’s strategy seems to be all over the place; by all accounts, it depends on who the Prime Minister last spoke to Friends of the Government have made millions, while some of my constituents have had no help whatsoever and have lost their jobs, or their jobs are hanging on by a thread. Just last night, two constituents told me that they had been made redundant and another told me about their son who had lost his apprenticeship Of course, forgotten and excluded by this Government are the sole traders who are limited companies, self-employed people, who are getting little or no help, and hospitality, which has been sacrificed by this Government. I do not know whether it is the same in the Prime Minister’s and Ministers’ constituencies, but many pubs in my constituency are very much part of the community and the culture. They and restaurants have done everything possible to make themselves covid-safe, spending many thousands of pounds. There is still no evidence to suggest that any sizeable outbreaks occur in hospitality Many of my constituents have gone into debt with their rent, mortgages and bills, and they have no idea how they will pay for this. Of course, that also has unintended health consequences. Children are petrified about the exams next year, because they have been in and out of school for months now A question that has never been properly addressed, which I have spoken about on a number of occasions in this House, is that of the unintended health consequences. I put in a freedom of information request to my local clinical commissioning group about referrals from GPs, and the information I got back was staggering: GP referrals for first out-patient appointments for cardio dropped by 66% between September 2019 and September 2020, with gastro referrals dropping by 64%, renal medicine referrals dropping by 57% and ophthalmology referrals dropping by 68%. Those drops are just in referrals, never mind what has happened to the waiting times, where targets are being missed time and again. I have also asked the CCG for figures to let me know whether there have been excess non-covid deaths at home I wish briefly to mention councils, which are not getting enough support. Halton Borough Council is doing a really good job, but it will have a deficit of about £8.6 million. It needs more support, and it is important that we give more support and financial aid to councils to do more locally. Local is better and it proves to be more effective I wish briefly to mention the vaccines. If, as we are hearing, these vaccines are going to be very effective, it is even more crucial that the Government get their strategy right for delivery and that we do not see a repeat of the incompetence we saw over personal protective equipment and test and trace. We need to make sure we all work together for effective take-up. Retaining people’s confidence will be crucial to that, and we do not need Government incoherence. On 16 October, the Secretary of State said that a new, simpler system of alert levels would be in place, but three weeks later we went into a national lockdown. Today, we see that the Government want to put in place new regulations and restrictions, which will be reviewed again later this month My constituents deserve to be treated with respect and not patronised; being granted a few days of normality over Christmas by the Government as some sort of reward for their sacrifice is not on. In the real world, many people will not have an enjoyable Christmas, as they have lost their jobs and are desperately worried about their finances. I am not against restrictions in total. There have to be some restrictions, but there has to be a balance involving the economic and health consequences as well. I will be voting against these restrictions tonight.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-commons.u228	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-01	Twigg, John Derek	Against government regulations and strategy	2020-12-01 00:00:00	2020-12-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons	Of course, but let me just finish this point with my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Victoria Prentis) Where did we all learn that it was normal and expected to get out of bed in the morning, have a bit of a wash and a tidy-up, get ourselves to school and then on to work, and all the rest of it? It was from our parents. Growing up in Cardiff, I can remember large council estates where worklessness was endemic, and where the welfare state had not been that support, safety net or springboard, but had instead become a way of life for too many people. If that is the case, how on earth can we expect anybody to learn the work ethic I chaired the all-party parliamentary group for multiple sclerosis, which two years ago held an inquiry into people with MS who were in work and wanted to stay in work. Without reducing employability to a utilitarian argument, for people to feel that, even with a painful degenerative condition, they could still play an active, productive role in their family’s life, in the life of their community and thereby in the life of the economy nationally, had a huge impact on their mental health. I therefore entirely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury, who speaks with great passion on this issue An understanding of employment and the benefits that flow from it has to be rehearsed again and again by Treasury Ministers and other Ministers. We take this for granted, possibly because it is in our DNA and possibly because it is the only thing that we have ever known, but we must be conscious that there are others in our country who have not. We should be advocates, apostles, evangelisers and any other word one could think of in shouting from the rafters the strong benefits of employment.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-08-commons.u491	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-08	Hoare, Simon James	Promoting employment benefits and ethics	2019-01-08 00:00:00	2019-01-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords	My Lords, there are approximately 12,000 outdoor statues in England. In the region of 3,500 are protected as, or as part of, listed buildings; of those, 473 are of historical figures. The future of the vast majority of these historic statues is the responsibility of the owners, usually local authorities. The government policy on historic public statues is quite clear: they should not be removed but retained, with a fuller contextualisation on the background and history of those commemorated provided; this is summarised as “retain and explain”.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords.u3	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-19	Barran, Diana	Retain and explain statues	2020-10-19 00:00:00	2020-10-19 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons	The hon. Lady is absolutely right. I know that even before she was in this House she had a very distinguished career in speaking up for the disadvantaged, particularly children and young people, who need the helping hand of Government as well as the support of civil society in order to achieve everything they can. She is absolutely right: there is much more that we need to do. We have touched on schools, but there are many other areas where we need to improve what we do—from child and adolescent mental health services to making sure that those in care are better supported. She is absolutely right.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons.u138	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-11	Gove, Michael Andrew	Supporting disadvantaged youths	2020-06-11 00:00:00	2020-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-lords	My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat in the form of a Statement the Answer given by my right honourable friend the Minister for Asia to an Urgent Question in the other place. The Statement is as follows: “Following the Easter Sunday attacks in Sri Lanka there have been reports of isolated incidents of violence and reports of intimidation and discrimination against Muslims, refugees and asylum seekers. In Negombo, one of the suburbs to the north of Colombo where the terrorist attacks took place, 985 refugees and asylum seekers were forcibly displaced from their ordinary places of residence according to UN figures. These refugees and asylum seekers, who are mostly of Pakistani origin, are being temporarily housed and protected to meet their immediate security and humanitarian needs. Our high commission in Colombo is in contact with the Government and UN agencies, working to find a more sustainable solution, and we are monitoring the situation carefully The United Nations is providing basic support—food, drinking water and immediate medical assistance—and co-ordinating with civil society to provide additional relief items. The humanitarian situation at the police station is a concern. The police have so far been welcoming, but we do understand that the facilities are insufficient. Staff at our high commission are also assisting in advocating and co-ordinating with the Sri Lankan Government to identify safe and secure relocation options to ensure the protection of refugees and asylum seekers. We also understand that processes are under way for some of the refugees to be resettled in third countries. Some 412 refugees are currently in the resettlement process of the UNHCR Ministers and representatives of the UK Government have met Sri Lankan counterparts over the past three weeks to reinforce the importance of inclusivity and respect for human rights in the response to the Easter Sunday attacks and to underline the importance of Sri Lankans working together to avoid intercommunal tensions. The Minister for Security and Economic Crime visited Sri Lanka on 2 and 3 May and met the President, Prime Minister, military and religious leaders and senior government officials, highlighting the importance of those points. Lord Ahmad and I have met with the Sri Lankan high commissioner over the past fortnight to raise concerns about refugees and minority rights in Sri Lanka”.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-09-lords.u59	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-09	Ahmad, Tariq	Sri Lanka easter attacks aftermath	2019-05-09 00:00:00	2019-05-09 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons	I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. The issue of safety is of paramount importance. We must go about our duties able to determine that not just all of us but our staff members and our constituents will be safe The right hon. Gentleman may be making a personal choice to stay down here, but just think about that. The Leader of the House indicated that we may not go into recess towards the end of July, so it might well be that the right hon. Gentleman and others are committing themselves to being away from home—away from their families—for a prolonged period. Why? Why, when we know that the hybrid facilities, in the main, work On this nonsense—and I have to say that it is nonsense—that Bill Committees have not sat, it is in the gift of the Government to bring forward a set of circumstances that will allow Bill Committees to meet. I must say to the Leader of the House that there is a responsibility on us to arrive at a consensus on these matters. This is not about the Government; this is about Parliament It is fair to say that the Opposition parties, as well as a considerable number of Government Members, are strongly opposed to what the Government propose. I implore the Leader of the House on reflection to accept the amendments that have been tabled, which would allow us collectively to deal with the situation we are in and get to a set of circumstances in which Parliament can do its job. I am in the situation that very few of my Members are here today, because we did not want to expose more Members than necessary to the kinds of risks that the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland referred to. I pose the question again: why should we be in this situation If I may say so, this is not just about Members of Parliament who have health concerns. Even if we arrived at a situation, as has been suggested, in which they could be excused or paired, anyone in that category would have been identified as having particular health circumstances. Is that right? But this is not just about Members of Parliament who have their own health concerns; it is about Members of Parliament who may have family members who are shielding. We are talking about a considerable number of Members of Parliament who risk being disadvantaged Of course, in Scotland—it was the case in England as well—the public advice was to stay at home, to protect the NHS and to save lives. The Government’s official line was that if people could work from home, they should. Well, we can work from home. We should work from home, because that is the right thing to do, not just for Parliament but for our families, our colleagues and our constituents. We have asked employers to be flexible; the Commons should be too MPs were working effectively. The hybrid system, though not perfect, was more efficient than the system we now have in place. The right hon. Member for Staffordshire Moorlands reflected on that. Look at the number of people who can be in the Chamber, and contrast that with those who could participate in our hybrid proceedings. The whole point about the hybrid proceedings is that Members who, for their own reasons, choose to come here can continue to do so, but those who need to, want to and should participate on a hybrid basis are not disenfranchised. Many colleagues across the House cannot come into work—Members who are shielding; Members who cannot travel—and the UK Government are willingly disenfranchising them and their constituents.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons.u276	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-02	Blackford, Ian	Support hybrid parliamentary proceedings	2020-06-02 00:00:00	2020-06-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-lords	We now come to the group beginning with Amendment 63. I remind noble Lords that anyone wishing to speak after the Minister should email the clerk during the debate. Anyone wishing to press this or anything else in the group to a Division should make this clear in debate Amendment 63	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-16-lords.u160	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-16	Duncan, Ian	Introduction of Amendment 63	2020-09-16 00:00:00	2020-09-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-14-commons	The crux of the right hon. Lady’s question is whether the British Government would recognise the state of Palestine, and I think she can anticipate my response. We support the two-state solution, when the time is right. That inevitably implies that we will support—recognise—the state of Palestine, but in the meantime we are engaged in building institutions that are necessary to sustain such a state. As I said earlier, that means building institutions across the piece, and we will continue to do that.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-14-commons.u146	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-14	Murrison, Andrew William	Support two-state solution eventually	2019-05-14 00:00:00	2019-05-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-commons	I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his speech. Like him, I have many Moray producers who are responsible for produce of outstanding quality that is renowned across the globe. However, does he agree that tonight’s debate is a useful opportunity to set the record straight? There has never been a Division in this House that has lowered animal welfare standards and, as he said, the EU withdrawal Act takes all the legislation from the EU that protects our environmental standards, food safety standards and animal welfare standards on to the UK statute book.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-24-commons.u419	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-24	Ross, Douglas Gordon	Defending UK animal welfare standards	2020-06-24 00:00:00	2020-06-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-lords	My Lords, I will pick up that issue. This is a pre-pack administration, is it not? In a pre-pack, the people who lose out are the trade creditors and the people who survive are the owners of the original company, who walk away with a new company unencumbered by the debts its previous creditors allowed. How can the Minister defend that? As my noble friend said, this involves thousands of SMEs, which will lose jobs and supply of cash, and be worse off. The Government reviewed this whole process in 2014. They accepted the recommendation of the Graham review to take powers in the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015 to make sure that pre-packs were properly regulated. What is the progress on that?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-20-lords.u48	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-20	Stevenson, Robert	Pre-pack administration hurts SMEs	2019-03-20 00:00:00	2019-03-20 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-lords	My Lords, does my noble friend agree that nobody would ever take any medicines if they read the leaflet in the packet in detail? That is the sort of risk we are talking about. Does he further agree that the deal on offer should be accepted tonight in another place and we should then move on?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-lords.u148	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-12	Cormack, Patrick	Approve deal despite risks	2019-03-12 00:00:00	2019-03-12 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right; regional airports can have such a major impact on the local communities they serve, and there is much pride in having an airport within one’s area. These airports are absolutely part of our levelling-up agenda and of being able to increase and improve our UK’s connectivity, not just within the UK, but abroad. That is absolutely part of our recovery and planning for the future,	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons.u180	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-03	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Support for regional airports	2020-06-03 00:00:00	2020-06-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons	Those moving to universal credit will get more than 25% of their award through two weeks of additional housing benefit and, as of next year, jobseeker’s allowance, employment and support allowance and income support. Advances are available to cover the interim period, but we recognise the concerns about the payments in arrears and would welcome further ideas.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons.u113	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-01	Quince, William James	Universal credit transition, extra support	2019-07-01 00:00:00	2019-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-lords	This is a very important and huge Bill, with lots in it. I will concentrate on one tiny bit of it, Clause 1(1)(b), which provides that one of the purposes of financial assistance can be for “supporting public access to and enjoyment of the countryside, farmland or woodland and better understanding of the environment” Those are two important things. As a former geography teacher I could wax lyrical about understanding the environment, but I will talk about access. I declare my interests as vice-president of the Open Spaces Society and a patron of the British Mountaineering Council. I compliment the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, on his sensible comments on this, and my noble friend Lord Addington, who I see is in his place, also made some extremely sensible and balanced comments The nation’s path network is a treasured asset that everyone should be able to enjoy. It is the primary way in which people access the outdoors and connect with nature. Going walking is the main physical activity that people do. It brings huge benefits to rural communities, local businesses and tourism, and it helps to improve our understanding of farming and the natural world. What happens as a result of the Bill will set the agenda for access to the countryside for years to come While the Bill says what may happen, it has no detail in it whatever—not even a broad framework—on how it will happen. If we assume that the ambition is to enable more people to access and enjoy the countryside, while at the same time rewarding land managers and farmers for undertaking the activities to achieve this, I think we really need more from the Government on how this will work, particularly how they will work with local access authorities to help achieve this. The local access authorities and highways authorities that look after public rights of way are responsible for producing public rights of way improvement plans—they are not flavour of the moment—and for dealing with problems when a footpath is blocked or falls into the beck and making sure that the infrastructure for things like stiles exists The common agricultural policy was not all bad. It included cross-compliance which, in respect of rights of way, was useful to local enforcement and access authorities—they could use it to persuade recalcitrant landowners to provide the minimum standards necessary. It is not clear how this will be replaced under the new system One major absence from the aims of this Bill is landscape. One of the main public by-products of goods from farming is our wonderful British landscape in all parts of the UK. People think that they are wild landscapes, but they are not; they are the result of land management and farming. This needs attention in the Bill.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-10-lords.u198	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-10	Greaves, Anthony Robert	Bill lacks implementation details	2020-06-10 00:00:00	2020-06-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-commons	On Radio 4 this morning, there was harrowing testimony from a British woman who is a volunteer ambulance driver in the region about the atrocities that she has witnessed. There is a big Kurdish community in Scotland, and they have a community centre at Dumbryden in my constituency. I know that the Kurdish community in my constituency will be very keen to know, as I am, what assistance the UK Government are giving, as opposed to UK volunteers on the ground, and what steps the UK Government are taking to prevent such atrocities from being perpetrated against civilians by our NATO ally.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-15-commons.u33	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-15	Cherry, Joanna Catherine	UK aid to Kurds queried	2019-10-15 00:00:00	2019-10-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-29-commons	Amendment 14 has the effect of aligning the registration deadline for Scotland with the registration deadline in the rest of the United Kingdom, by removing the need for the St Andrew’s day bank holiday in Scotland to be taken into account. I congratulate the Minister on his wisdom in bringing forward that sensible amendment, but I wonder whether he could confirm that Scotland is being treated fairly with this amendment. On the Conservative Benches, we are most concerned to ensure the fair treatment of Scotland. We are very proud that Scotland is in the United Kingdom, and we are determined to ensure the fair treatment of people throughout the great country of Scotland.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-29-commons.u738	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-29	Baker, Steven John	Scotland registration deadline alignment	2019-10-29 00:00:00	2019-10-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-02-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for her interest in the Asia Bibi case, which I know is shared in all parts of this House. I reassure the hon. Lady that making sure that she is safe, and has somewhere safe to go, is a top priority for this Government. We have had numerous private discussions with the Pakistani Government about how to progress this issue. I do not want to go into the details of those discussions, but we are making progress and I am very hopeful that this will have a positive outcome.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-02-commons.u32	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-02	Hunt, Jeremy Richard Streynsham	Asia Bibi safety progressing	2019-04-02 00:00:00	2019-04-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-04-lords	My Lords, child abuse is endemic in many institutions and has been historically. What is being done to ensure that people who are now older, but who suffered so terribly in different institutions, are still encouraged to come forward, give evidence and seek justice? We know that many have already committed suicide or died, but it is very important that we do not forget that those children and young people need protecting.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-04-lords.u27	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-04	Hussein-Ece, Meral	Seeking justice for older survivors	2019-07-04 00:00:00	2019-07-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-lords	My Lords, I begin by drawing attention to my interests as set out in the register. I do this because some of what I want to say today, particularly about technology, reflects things that I learned while I was serving as an adviser to a firm operating in this field. I want to make it clear, however, that I no longer have any commercial interests in this area Having got that matter out of the way, I add my congratulations to my noble friend Lady Newlove on securing this debate. Like my noble friend Lady Jenkin, I pay tribute to the outstanding job that she has done both as this country’s first Champion for Active, Safer Communities and, more recently, as the Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales, a position from which she retired at the end of last month I am sure that my noble friend would agree that neither of those jobs was easy, but I can tell noble Lords that, on the basis of reports I have had from police and crime commissioners around the country, my noble friend has carried out both jobs with great distinction and that she leaves her most recent post, that of Victims’ Commissioner, with the heartfelt thanks and deep respect of all those who care about victims and are trying to help them In two previous speeches that I made on domestic violence in your Lordships’ House, I talked about the availability of technology which would improve both the safety and happiness of victims of domestic abuse but which could not yet be used effectively in this country because the courts did not have the power to make it mandatory. On both occasions, I urged the Government to introduce legislation to allow this to happen before more innocent victims lost their lives in attacks that could have been prevented had this technology been in use. I therefore make no apology for returning to this subject again today. We really are talking about matters of life and death The technology that I have in mind is a form of electronic monitoring or tagging developed specifically for domestic abuse cases and known as proximity monitoring and notification systems. These systems provide victims with early alerts that their potential attacker is in the vicinity, whether the victims are at home, at work, with friends or on the move. They do this by fitting the potential attacker—sometimes called the offender or perpetrator—with a securely attached radio frequency, or RF, ankle tag and by giving him a GPS tracking unit, which he must carry with him whenever he leaves his home base If the offender tries to tamper with the ankle tag or leave home without the tracking device, an alert is generated at the monitoring centre associated with the scheme, 24/7. In this way, his location is continuously tracked by the monitoring centre. Whenever an offender fitted with this equipment attempts to enter a predefined restricted zone—for example, within 500 metres of the victim’s home or workplace or wherever the victim happens to be at the time—the technology generates an alert. The alert is transmitted to the victim, who has been given a GPS alarm unit to carry with her at all times. The portable unit alerts her that the offender is nearby and that it would be sensible to leave the area. The offender is also alerted by those monitoring the system that he is entering a restricted zone and should leave it. At the same time, the police are alerted that the offender is heading into a restricted zone and can notify local units that they need to respond to a potential attack As I have said, I have referred to this technology in at least two speeches in your Lordships’ House. In both, I pointed out that, while proximity tagging does not deal with the underlying social and psychological causes of domestic abuse, it can save lives. To give your Lordships some idea of just how many lives I was talking about, I pointed out that between my first speech in November 2014 and my second in March 2018, 300 women had been the victims of domestic homicide However, this technology can save lives only if the courts have the power to make it mandatory. We have another opportunity to make this happen as part of the new domestic abuse protection orders to be included in the forthcoming domestic abuse Bill. I urge the Government to bring this Bill and these orders into law as expeditiously as possible so that this new technology can be trialled and introduced across the country. I know that several PCCs are simply waiting to be able to mount such trials as soon as the law permits them to do so I understand that this technology by itself is not a panacea for domestic abuse—indeed, it is not even a cast-iron guarantee that the victims of determined perpetrators will always be safe from harm. The use of tagging depends on adequate police resources to make it effective. There is no point in the police knowing that an attack is about to take place unless they have the resources available to prevent it. That is why technology by itself is only part of the answer. It must be complemented by adequate police resources and the appropriate legal powers I very much regret that I do not have the time to mention any of the many innovative, non-technological domestic abuse prevention and support programmes which police and crime commissioners up and down the country have developed and are funding, often out of their own resources. I have had emails from at least 10 PCCs giving terrific examples of what they are doing. I am sorry that I have not been able to include them, but I suspect that my noble friend Lady Seccombe will tell us something about what at least one PCC is doing in this area I do not want to sit down without mentioning the brilliant appointment of Dame Vera Baird, the PCC for Northumbria, as my noble friend Lady Newlove’s successor as Victims’ Commissioner. I congratulate Dame Vera on her appointment. I can think of no other PCC who has done more to highlight the importance of domestic abuse as a police priority. With her experience, both as a PCC and a Minister in Whitehall, victims of crime—and especially of domestic abuse—could have no better champion. Her task is immense and urgent. It is also critical to the safety of our communities. I wish her well.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-lords.u66	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-06	Wasserman, Gordon Joshua	Support mandatory domestic abuse tagging	2019-06-06 00:00:00	2019-06-06 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons	My hon. Friend is quite right that the regional airports—our smaller airports throughout the UK—will be and have been affected by coronavirus. I have given my assurances to those smaller airports that we will work with them on the recovery stage to secure our connectivity. They are important pieces of infrastructure and I am very cognisant of the fact that once such important pieces of infrastructure are closed or lost, it is harder to reinvigorate them, so I will be working my hardest to try to protect them.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-03-commons.u156	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-03	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Support for regional airports recovery	2020-06-03 00:00:00	2020-06-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons	I am genuinely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, and I hesitate to correct him, but if he thinks back to what he has just said, he will see that he has made a comparison that does not stand. He compared what happened in the indicative votes with the failure of the Government’s motion. The Government had to get a majority of the House, and they are 48 short of that, whereas not one of the indicative votes got within whispering distance of a majority of the House. Is the right hon. Gentleman suggesting that if the indicative votes process is brought back, each element should meet the requirement of a majority vote of the House?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-commons.u379	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-03	Duncan Smith, George Iain	Incorrect comparison on indicative votes	2019-04-03 00:00:00	2019-04-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for the emphasis she puts on international co-ordination. There are multilateral efforts to make sure we deal with everything from research and development of vaccines to capacity building for the most vulnerable countries. I am certainly happy to look at the details of any proposals if she wants to write to me. The challenge has been with different approaches, driven partly by different assessments of the risk, but also the pace at which coronavirus has spread and geography.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-commons.u257	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Raab, Dominic Rennie	International coordination on coronavirus response	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons	The Minister talks about human rights versus the devolution settlement. Does he agree that what came across in the debate, and hopefully it will be held not just here in Great Britain but in Northern Ireland, is that it is the careful selection and cherry-picking of some human rights issues but not others that causes the frustration?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-09-commons.u339	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-09	Campbell, Gregory Lloyd	Cherry-picking human rights issues	2019-07-09 00:00:00	2019-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	I thank my right hon. Friend for the breadth of the statement today. Necessarily, there is still a lot of detail to be worked out, not least on qualifications. For me, in talking to headteachers today, it has been humbling—not surprising, but humbling—to see the depth of their commitment to supporting their family and the whole of our society through this crisis. May I ask my right hon. Friend for flexibility, where necessary, to add to the designations of vulnerable children, as schools know their families best, and to add to the designations of key workers, where appropriate? May I also ask for schools to work together, where appropriate, in pairs or in clusters, particularly in areas where there are small schools?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u272	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Hinds, Damian Patrick George	Flexibility for schools and designations	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords	My Lords, I assure the noble Lord that, as I have said to other noble Lords, we will take a very strong line, as we have before on the death penalty in Bahrain and, indeed, other parts of the world. This case is yet to be decided; I remind noble Lords of that. Our support and technical support have yielded returns, including the review and retrial of this case. The noble Lord asked specifically whether we will be allowed to attend this trial. I believe that the rules of the Court of Cassation do not allow for the British embassy to attend or observe on this occasion. We await the outcome of the decision of the court. I have listened very carefully to the strength of representations in your Lordships’ House, as I always do, and will discuss it with other colleagues, including my right honourable friend the Minister for the Middle East.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords.u105	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Ahmad, Tariq	Strong stance on Bahrain death penalty	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons	I am sorry, but I am going to finish because I do not think that a third intervention will add anything to my time, to be perfectly honest. The Labour party policy on a second referendum is condescending because it says that people did not know what they voted for the first time round. The predictions of doom and gloom from the establishment in this country—the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund, the Government and leaflets through the door—and of 500,000 more people unemployed by December 2016 if we voted leave were so badly wrong that most of those public bodies had to apologise The policy is condescending, but it is also contradictory, because it suggests that people might not have understood it last time but will understand it this time. Why would they understand it this time if we do not have faith in them to understand it the first time? Why not then have a third or fourth referendum? Finally, it is dangerous, because we made a clear pledge that we would respect that referendum result. I thank the Labour party for its policy, but it is wrong.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons.u444	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Baron, John Charles	Labour party's referendum policy wrong	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-lords	The right reverend Prelate is entirely right to be focused on the support offered to both NHS and social care staff. There is considerable potential trauma in this area, and those who have been on the front line are under more pressure than one could possibly imagine. We have put in place schemes specifically targeted at both NHS and social care staff, and I reassure the right reverend Prelate that there is parity between the two sectors.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-01-lords.u47	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-01	Bethell, James	Support for NHS and social care	2020-07-01 00:00:00	2020-07-01 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons	There is strong evidence that place-based approaches can be an effective means of preventing a wide range of crimes, including acquisitive offences such as burglary and theft. That is why, on 1 October, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced the £25 million safer streets fund, which will support the communities worst affected by such crimes to implement effective situational prevention, such as street lighting and home security.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons.u79	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-28	Malthouse, Christopher Laurie	Support for place-based crime prevention	2019-10-28 00:00:00	2019-10-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	The noble Lord makes the point that whatever innocuous motivations may be expressed by Ministers at this stage, the powers in the Bill go far further. If there comes a stage where a Government are not so benign and have motivations that are political and unhelpful to the NHS—those could be, as I suggest, trade motivations—that presents a real risk. If easy access is given to the NHS in return, for example, for trade deals—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u143	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Marks, Jonathan	Bill's trade motivations risk NHS	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-lords	My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Hunt of Kings Heath for initiating this debate. Reading the National Health Service long-term plan is like being invited to a party without any food or drink: no money or plan for social care, no budget for training and educating the workforce, no indication of how local authorities will be able to afford their share of responsibility, and no budget announcement for public health. The National Audit Office has said that the crisis in social care, the state of finances in the NHS and the record staff shortages and waiting lists mean that the £20 billion announced by the Government as part of the 10-year plan could be wasted I will concentrate on health inequalities. When the Black report on health inequalities was published in 1980, it had a profound effect on me. It was published on the August bank holiday, and the newly elected Conservative Government rejected it. Thanks to Penguin Books, which published it in 1982, it had a wider audience and a huge impact on health inequalities. Yet here we are again. If you are woman living in Kensington and Chelsea or Camden, you are likely to live 7.4 years longer than a woman living in Manchester or Blackpool. A man living in East Dorset is likely to live 9.5 years longer than a man living in Manchester or Blackpool. The Chief Medical Officer’s annual report indicates that, “a child born in the most deprived areas would have 18 fewer years in good health than one born in the most affluent areas” Infant mortality, working poverty and cuts in benefits are on the increase, with the virtual disappearance of local authority support services, including children’s centres and smoking cessation classes. The geographical variation of working-age individuals on incapacity benefit is also stark: a 13% claimant rate in Blackpool; 8% in the south-west of Scotland, south Wales and the north-east of England and Merseyside; and below 4% in most of the south of England. The brutal closure of primary industries in the 1980s made these variations worse I would bet that there is an exact correlation between these areas and those who voted to leave the European Union, alienated every bit as much as from Westminster and Whitehall as they are from the EU. Time does not allow me to make comparisons with other countries, but it is not good. To ensure that the long-term plan works, the Government will need to accept the CMO’s recommendations on spending, housing and migration—that, and enormous political will.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-lords.u127	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-31	Donaghy, Rita	Ineffective NHS plan health inequalities	2019-01-31 00:00:00	2019-01-31 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-commons	I am very grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend and I congratulate him on the way in which he is making the case for this very important Bill My right hon. and learned Friend has talked about the confidence that we need to give domestic abuse victims in the experience they are likely to have within the criminal justice system. He is right to highlight special measures, and I know he will also talk about preventing defendants from cross-examining complainants. In relation to special measures, may I ask him to consider something that he and I know has worked well elsewhere—not just pre-recorded examination in chief but pre-recorded cross-examination? The benefit, as we know, is not just the complainant’s ability to get their part in the case out of the way altogether—dealing with the point about delay that the right hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry) made—but that it very often causes the defendant to recognise the position that he, and it often is he, is in and to plead guilty early.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-commons.u235	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-02	Wright, Jeremy Paul	Support for domestic abuse bill	2019-10-02 00:00:00	2019-10-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons	On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. On 8 June, the Minister responsible for children, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Vicky Ford), advised that the data regarding the number of children who have been reported missing from care since lockdown will not be available until 2021. On 10 June, the same Minister assured this House that she was closely monitoring the relaxation of legislation under statutory instrument No. 445, which weakened the statutory timescales for visits to children in care. Yesterday, in Education questions, she advised that the number of children missing from care had decreased throughout this pandemic These are children in the care of the state. Charities are reporting a significant rise in missing children, particularly those who are unaccompanied and trafficked. They are also reporting that these children are missing for longer time periods than they have been historically. These children are vulnerable to criminal gangs and sexual exploitation. Mr Deputy Speaker, do you know how I can get some clarity from the Minister regarding whether she does or does not know how many children are missing from care; if she does know, how many; and what exactly she is doing to find them?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-23-commons.u358	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-23	Lewell-Buck, Emma Louise	Clarification sought on missing children	2020-06-23 00:00:00	2020-06-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-lords	My Lords, it is vital that young people in alternative provision receive a high-quality education. We need to be just as ambitious for pupils in alternative provision as we are for those in mainstream schools. That is why my department is committed to reforming alternative provision, and published its road map for doing so last March. We have already made progress and launched a £4 million AP innovation fund, which is delivering projects to improve outcomes for children in AP.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-27-lords.u2	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-27	Younger, James	Reforming alternative provision education	2019-03-27 00:00:00	2019-03-27 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-commons	The hon. Lady is a doughty fighter on the matter of the Uyghur; she has corresponded with me on this matter a number of times. Now that we have left the EU, we are setting up our own sanctions Magnitsky scheme, and where there is clear evidence of named people, we can take that forward We have also announced that it is our intention to use our position as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council to highlight the issues faced by Christians and people of other faiths and beliefs in the middle east Of course, implementing the review’s recommendations is only part of our broader work to promote freedom of religion or belief around the globe. For example, we use our influence to speak up for persecuted Christians and individuals of other faiths in multilateral institutions such as the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the UN. Last year, we joined 87 other states to co-sponsor a UN resolution establishing the international day commemorating the victims of acts of violence based on religion or belief. We stand with the international community not only to honour those who have paid the ultimate price to practise their faith, but also to combat ongoing intolerance and discrimination, and that is why we call out specific countries that violate the right to freedom of religion or belief, including China, Iran and Russia.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-06-commons.u329	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-06	Wheeler, Heather Kay	Human rights advocacy and sanctions	2020-02-06 00:00:00	2020-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers), and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell) on securing the debate through the Backbench Business Committee. It has been a well-tempered discussion so far, but I have to say that I am pretty angry about what is happening so I may introduce one or two notes of rancour I am afraid In my area there are four maintained nursery schools: Brunswick, the Fields, Homerton and the Colleges. I know all of them well, and whenever I visit I am struck, as other Members have said of their nurseries, by the genuine care and dedication of the staff, who provide an excellent start. I am particularly struck by the support and engagement of parents and I am always struck by the messy play, but unfortunately I am also struck by the real sense of worry about the future because of the threat that future funding will not be secured As we have heard, the costs that these nurseries incur are higher, and in a high cost area such as Cambridge it is particularly expensive to hire staff so they are under huge pressure. That of course applies to all nurseries across the sector in Cambridge, but as we have heard the maintained nurseries have particular extra costs, because they are providing something different, because they are schools. Sometimes I do wonder whether the Government entirely grasp this point To say that funding streams and accountability within this sector are opaque barely does justice to the complexity. As we all know, this Government have, as usual, made promises on things such as 30 hours and then failed to provide the resources, so passing the buck to local councils who then all too frequently get the blame. As a result, providers within the sector all too easily end up pitted one against another when what we really need is everyone working together to achieve a shared goal: good quality, universal early-years provision with properly trained, well rewarded staff Sadly, we are a long way from that. In Cambridgeshire, providers are paid just £4.04 an hour to provide care. The Department for Education has confirmed that it will not provide an uplift in the hourly funding rate from 2019-20, so our nurseries will only receive a 1p rise, to £4.05 an hour. And as we have heard, after April 2020 there has been no guarantee that any supplementary funding will be received for maintained nurseries: no word from the Government about future funding. So these excellent providers, so loved by parents and children, struggle on with a sword of Damocles hanging over them as they battle to cover the high costs of running a service in an expensive city, and now are given no certainty over their futures. This affects hundreds of children, hundreds of families, and of course, many staff Sadly, this anxiety surrounding the plight of our nurseries’ funding is not a recent phenomenon; it has almost become a way of life. Very early on in my time in this House I was at the Fields nursery, working with anxious staff and parents over how their future would be secured. In 2017 I delivered a petition on this very subject in this Chamber, and over the years I have repeatedly asked Ministers about this and warned of the approaching cliff edge; time and again I have been told, “It’s all in hand and there isn’t a problem,” but that really is not true in Cambridge and, what is worse, staff have had to go on working week after week, month after month, year after year without any certainty. Frankly, it is a disgrace: the Government should hang their head in shame at the stress and distress their dereliction of responsibility has caused so many people. Austerity might have been a nice parlour game for Osborne and Cameron—a nice bit of political triangulation—but it has caused untold damage and harm, tearing at the fabric of society, and the maintained nursery sector is a particular victim. Frankly, no one should ever forgive the Conservatives for these self-obsessions. Just as it is with the European Union, so it is with austerity: it is always about internal ideological battles and never about the public good In the latest round of this long-running saga, the most recent Minister has said that nurseries and local authorities should hold off from making decisions until after the spending review. Well, great. In the current chaos, without any certainty about when the spending review will even take place, that is frankly hopeless.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-commons.u431	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-31	Zeichner, Daniel Stephen	Nursery funding uncertainty and criticism	2019-01-31 00:00:00	2019-01-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords	The noble Lord is quite right that in July we brought in a one-kilometre aerodrome restriction, but that was always meant as an initial measure. We did not have any protection beforehand, and that is the case with many countries. It was an interim measure and we said at the time that we would work very closely with the aviation industry, pilots’ unions, including BALPA, and NATS to question whether the restriction zone was large enough. We have come to the conclusion that it is not. Obviously hundreds of thousands of people live within a five-kilometre boundary of airports, so we need to make sure that we have the right exclusion zone. However, we have had conversations about this matter and have now seen evidence that, in order to ensure safety, we need to extend the restriction, and that is exactly what we are doing The noble Lord also rightly points out the issues around prisons, and the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office are working very closely on those. Last year they launched Operation Trenton to work together to intercept drones and track down the criminals behind them. To date, there have been 17 convictions related to drone activity and that work will continue, but it is the same challenge. The correct technology does not exist at the moment, although it is being developed very quickly. As a department and as a Government, we have invested in the extension of that technology and there are lots of interesting commercial opportunities too. As the technology develops, it will help airports and prisons, as well as this building and other important infrastructure.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords.u201	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Sugg, Elizabeth	Extending aerodrome drone restriction zone	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons	My hon. Friend is making an extremely important point about the steel industry. I am reminded of the closure of Ravenscraig in Lanarkshire in Scotland in 1992. That was a massive steelworks. I was born in 1989, and nearly 30 years on, the vast bulk of that site is still wasteland. A whole generation have grown up with the impact of that. The idea that we can just turn these industries on and off and that the people around them are not affected is totally wrong-headed. That is the economic vandalism that this Government’s laissez-faire approach is doing to communities if they do not intervene to save nationally strategic industries such as steel.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-23-commons.u259	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-23	Sweeney, Paul John	Steel industry impact on communities	2019-05-23 00:00:00	2019-05-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords	My Lords, first, I thank the noble Lord for his kind remarks on my efforts in this regard, but it is something that has been worked on over many years and my own personal efforts fall to the side when we look at the commitment and ultimate sacrifice by the likes of Sergei Magnitsky, whom we have mentioned already, and Bill Browder, among others On the issue of senior people within Administrations and Governments, I think that that bis reflected in the designations we have made in the case of Myanmar, specifically with the generals, and, of course, I stress again the importance of the evidence base On other matters that the noble Lord raised as to what can be held within the scope of what tools are used, I make note of what he has said. I believe there are separations of certain things that are done in business, but we should also scrutinise decisions that we take very carefully and make sure that they do not fall foul of this new regime.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-08-lords.u174	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-08	Ahmad, Tariq	Gratitude, commitment, sacrifice, scrutiny	2020-07-08 00:00:00	2020-07-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons	The Welsh Labour Government have implemented the fund. The Scottish Government have implemented the fund. Councils across Northern Ireland have implemented the fund. I really do appreciate that the Minister has been supportive of my ask, and I actually feel quite sorry for him that he has to respond to me and explain why England has not followed the rest of the UK Let me describe two incidents that have happened today. I have had an email from parents not 100 miles from here whose three-month-old baby is in a mortuary, and they are unable to take the baby out of there because they do not have the money to pay the local authority fees. To make the comparison with Wales, I also had an email from Tŷ Hafan, a Welsh children’s hospice, to tell me that because of the Welsh children’s funeral fund, parents can now afford headstones, which would not have been affordable if they had had to pay for the funerals. That is the difference that the fund makes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons.u442	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-01	Harris, Carolyn	England lacks children's funeral fund	2019-05-01 00:00:00	2019-05-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons	The hon. Gentleman is right about the importance of a cross-Government approach. It is something that is needed not just today; it has to be a long-term, sustained approach, with Departments and public agencies working together. That is why our cross-party serious violence taskforce involves Government Departments as well as other agencies and public authorities. It is also important that we listen to all levels of Government. He rightly mentioned West Midlands police, a force I have visited on many occasions—I visited it only recently to look at some of the work it is doing to combat serious violence. I will always listen carefully to all local police forces, including West Midlands police, to see what more can be done.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-commons.u246	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-04	Javid, Sajid	Cross-Government sustained approach needed	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons	With the leave of the House, we shall take motions 4 to 8 together Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)), Exiting the European Union (Private International Law) That the draft Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 12 December 2018, be approved Exiting the European Union (Financial Services) That the draft Financial Markets and Insolvency (Amendment and Transitional Provision) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 13 December 2018, be approved. Exiting the European Union (Diamond trading) That the draft Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 20 December 2018, be approved Exiting the European Union (Road Traffic) That the draft Drivers’ Hours and Tachographs (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 14 January, be approved Local Government That the draft Buckinghamshire (Structural Changes) (Modification of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007) Regulations 2019, which were laid before this House on 14 January, be approved. —(Michelle Donelan. ) Question agreed to.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-06-commons.u219	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-06	Hoyle, Lindsay Harvey	EU Exit regulations approval	2019-02-06 00:00:00	2019-02-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons	I have no doubt that we will continue bilateral arrangements with our EU friends to ensure that both of our populations are protected, but I am glad that the hon. Gentleman gives me the opportunity to remind the House that we are recruiting another 20,000 police officers to make this country safer and one of the safest in the world.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons.u270	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Increase police recruitment, ensure safety	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	That will teach me to watch the time more carefully I have asked a lot in this short debate. In the weeks and months ahead, farmers will become more important to us all. We will rely on what they produce in ways that we have probably never considered but now need to because we are in a national emergency.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u403	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Liddell-Grainger, Ian Richard Peregrine	Farmers' importance in emergency	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords	The Reverend Norman Hamilton has worked on the interface in north Belfast for 20 years, and hundreds of clergy and ordinary people—doctors, nurses and lawyers—all signed, from all sides of the community. They wanted one thing: to be respected as people and to allowed to make their own law on this amendment. That shows how concerned people are about this matter My amendment would not prevent legal change on either abortion or same-sex marriage. It would simply have the effect of restoring some constitutional integrity to Northern Ireland. It requires that there should be a consultation with the people of Northern Ireland, as there would be with any legal change on either issue in Northern Ireland, and most importantly that the views of the currently elected Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly be recorded for or against any regulations and that the regulations should not be laid before Parliament if they do not receive majority support from those Assembly Members. One thing I have not done is to introduce anything resembling a petition of concern, about which I think the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, spoke earlier. The legislation could pass by a simple majority One thing I noticed this afternoon was that the unborn child was largely absent from the debate. When mentioned, there was in some quarters a rolling of eyes and expressions of contempt. Yet it has to be said that abortion is about killing babies—real babies. Without Amendment 23, the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill will go down in British constitutional history as one of its blackest moments of all times, when constitutional due process was completely swept aside because of the conviction of parliamentarians, none of whom represents Northern Ireland, that the end justifies the means. That is never a good place to be. We have heard it said that it does not really matter at all if Northern Ireland’s MPs voted against this, because it is a matter of human rights and if you want to be in the UK you have to accept abortion as a human right. There is no human right to abortion, and I think that is slightly contemptuous of Northern Ireland’s MPs The Member for Walthamstow, who introduced new Clause 10 in the Commons, said this morning that this is an attempt by the DUP to hold us all to ransom. At this late hour, I perhaps need to assure noble Lords that I am not a member of the DUP. I am a Cross-Bencher and, as far as I can remember, the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Eames, is not a member of the DUP either. This is something that a cross-party group of 16,000 people are asking us not to do. This is the truest cross-community co-operation from all sectors of our community, from all sides, all places in our beautiful country. We have agreement that we do not want abortion railroaded through in the Bill. I ask noble Lords to at least grant Northern Ireland MLAs the courtesy, the respect and dignity of their roles as elected members and allow them to present their views on this matter. I ask noble Lords to give the people of Northern Ireland the same respect and provide for consultation. I beg to move.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords.u261	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-15	O'Loan, Nuala Patricia	Respect Northern Ireland's legislative autonomy	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons	I am happy to say that we work with all our partners across the world; we would not allow dogma to get in the way of securing the rights of British nationals. I am proud that we have that flexibility and I am grateful to the Cuban Foreign Minister for arranging it. We also had close to 3,000 British nationals on the Azura, docked in Bridgetown, and they arrived back in the UK over the weekend without incident. We had 355 British nationals on the Norwegian Spirit, and they took a flight back to the UK on 23 March. That is the progress we have made, but the hon. Gentleman is right to highlight cruise ships that were travelling after we changed the travel advice for such ships. We have a specific eye and focus on making sure that Brits on board those cruise ships get back safe and sound.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-24-commons.u205	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-24	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Successful repatriation of British nationals	2020-03-24 00:00:00	2020-03-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-28-lords	My Lords, as so often, my noble friend Lord Wigley has spoken for the wide consensus on this question in Wales. I will speak specifically in support of Amendments 74, 75 and 99, which seek to ensure that the Henry VIII powers of the Secretary of State to amend the Bill’s provisions relating to market access on mutual recognition, non-discrimination and the “legitimate aim” of regulatory requirements are referred to the devolved Administrations for their consultation and consent. I do so following a series of excellent opening speeches, notably by the noble Lord, Lord German, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope. The Bill has been justified on the basis that it is intended to support the UK internal market for goods and services once EU rules no longer apply after the transition period ends on 31 December. These rules, derived from EU law, place constraints on the ability of government institutions within the UK to impose constraints on the free movement of goods, as well as people, and significantly reduce the scope for measures that would restrict intra-UK trade. One reason that the UK Government wish to constrain the autonomy of the devolved Administrations in this area is that countries with which the UK is trying to negotiate trade deals may wish to clarify that they have access to the whole UK market, or Great Britain market if the Northern Ireland protocol survives, as it must do A White Paper published by the Government in July 2020 claimed that the Bill would provide “frictionless trade”, “fair competition” and protection for businesses and consumers within the UK. To achieve these aims, two market access principles were identified, namely mutual recognition and non-discrimination, which would constrain the ability of all relevant actors within the UK, be they regulators, local authorities or devolved Administrations, to impose new regulations on goods and services. These limit the ability of devolved Governments to regulate economic activity far more than did their EU predecessors. So much for taking back control. Obviously, that does not apply to devolved legislatures, which will lose control under the Bill—to Whitehall The UK internal market was initially seen as one strand of work, begun in October 2017 by the four Governments within the UK, to establish a common approach in key policy areas of returned EU rule, referred to as common frameworks, about which I spoke in the last Session. However, it is generally agreed that, by removing the internal market from these discussions and pushing ahead without the agreement of the devolved Authorities, the common framework approach is being completely undermined by the UK Government In response to the White Paper, the Welsh Government insisted that any new system must have independent oversight and dispute resolution, and that common rules must be agreed by all four Governments. When the Bill was published, Jeremy Miles, the Welsh Government Counsel General, called it an “attack on democracy”, and the Scottish Constitution Minister pointed out that the concept of mutual recognition could mean that Scotland, for example, would be forced to accept lower food standards—an area that is currently devolved—against its express wishes The mutual recognition provisions would, therefore, effectively prevent one part of the UK unilaterally imposing and enforcing requirements, for example for the presentation or characteristics of goods, which are covered by this principle, which also applies to services. There are exceptions under the Northern Ireland protocol. “Manner of sale” requirements, on the other hand, for example governing to whom products may be sold or their price, would not be covered by mutual recognition but by the non-discrimination provisions of the Bill. The exclusion of price from the mutual recognition principle was driven, in part, by arguments in the other place about what the Bill might mean for Scotland’s minimum alcohol pricing regime—subsequently adopted in Wales, more or less—in response to the public health challenge from excessive alcohol consumption Schedule 2 contains lists of services that are excluded from the principles of mutual recognition and non-discrimination, such as healthcare, transport and water supply, as well as some privately provided services. Amendments 74 and 75 require the Secretary of State to consult and/or seek the consent of the devolved Administrations before making changes to Schedule 2 If there is wariness about enabling any one of the devolved nations to exercise a veto—for example, the Scottish nationalists simply refusing to consent to something which would benefit the rest of the UK —leading to deadlock, why, as I have suggested several times in recent debates in your Lordships’ House, do the Government not adopt the Welsh Government’s proposal for a Council of Ministers-type model with a form of qualified majority voting, in place of the current Joint Ministerial Committee, which has been dysfunctional and, frankly, worse than useless? I specifically ask the Minister to respond to this suggestion of the Welsh Government to have a Council of Ministers-type model with qualified majority voting, which could overcome many of the issues involved. This model would require the UK Government, since it represents England with its disproportionately large population and share of GDP, to secure the agreement of at least one devolved Administration before overriding any devolved Administration that wanted to exercise a veto The Bill prohibits both direct and indirect discrimination. The latter is permitted if it can reasonably be considered a “legitimate aim”, as defined in the Bill. However, with the Bill as it stands, the Secretary of State can redefine that term by regulations, subject only to an affirmative resolution procedure. Amendment 99 rightly seeks to ensure that there is consultation and consent from the devolved Administrations before doing so. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Government or the Minister, for that matter, would object to that New functions will be bestowed on the Competition and Markets Authority—the CMA—to monitor and report on the impact of specific regulations that are considered to potentially have a detrimental effect on the internal market. The Bill also proposes to establish an office for the internal market within the CMA to oversee the application of these principles and the functioning of the internal market. Expert analysis has shown that, whereas EU law had a symmetrical effect upon the UK Parliament and devolved legislatures, the Bill will have an inherently asymmetrical effect as it will become a protected enactment, which the devolved legislatures will be powerless to repeal or modify The Bill will also narrow the territorial scope of devolved legislation. Regulations relating to goods, passed by the Senedd, for example, will apply only to goods produced in Wales or imported directly into Wales from outside the UK. They will not apply to goods imported from the rest of the UK. This, as acknowledged by the business department’s impact assessment of the Bill, would reduce the ability of local legislatures to produce targeted social and environmental objectives, so that the intended societal—[Inaudible. ]	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-28-lords.u149	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-28	Hain, Peter	Bill undermines devolved administrations' autonomy	2020-10-28 00:00:00	2020-10-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords	Is it not extraordinary that the Labour Party should remind us of the poor position of social housing? After all, the Blair Government had a very low quantum of building, the Brown Government followed suit and, I am sorry to say, the Cameron Government acted similarly. Against that background, is the example that my noble friend gave today not encouraging: that for a particular need the local authority is getting land at below cost price? Should that be the policy—for social housing only, where there is currently demand in some of our great cities?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-lords.u34	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Morris, Michael	Social housing policy query	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-lords	Exactly. Brexit delayed is Brexit denied. Yet, with the latest deadline looming, Members of this House and the other place are scheming, yet again, to frustrate the wish of the majority of the British people and to undermine the Prime Minister’s determination to deliver Brexit—and, may I say, with a deal; that is what he trying to do. This plotting is as calculating as it is unworthy. It is, to quote Sir John Major, “political chicanery”. This is not a struggle between two types of democracy: parliamentary and plebiscite; it is a blending of the two. It was Parliament itself that agreed the referendum, undertook to implement it and, by a thumping majority, voted to trigger Article 50. Because it makes Brexit more difficult and revoke more likely, the Benn Act is, in reality, a distortion of parliamentary democracy, not its triumphant assertion As for negotiation, to rob the Prime Minister of the option to walk away from the negotiating table is self-defeating madness. It is like playing the Wimbledon finals with a hole in your racquet. We have to ask the question: what is behind this Westminster scheming to get another extension of Article 50?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-lords.u129	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-02	Meyer, Catherine	Delaying Brexit undermines democracy	2019-10-02 00:00:00	2019-10-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons	I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is misinformed. We are absolutely committed to making the UK the safest place to go online. The online harms White Paper will set out how we are going to make world-leading legislation. We intend to publish that before the end of the year and the legislation to follow at the very beginning of next year.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-commons.u37	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-23	Dinenage, Caroline Julia	Online safety legislation forthcoming	2020-09-23 00:00:00	2020-09-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons	I hear my hon. Friend’s point, but does he not agree that one of the greatest bastions against this behaviour by the Chinese Government would be for all members of the free world, particularly the Five Eyes, to come together both to condemn their behaviour and to themselves talk about introducing sanctions against China if it carries on behaving like this?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-30-commons.u389	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-30	Duncan Smith, George Iain	Call for unified sanctions against China	2020-11-30 00:00:00	2020-11-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-lords	I agree with the noble Lord that an apology is not enough. There has been an apology, but we must await the outcome of the independent review within the department to know fully how this happened and whether any permanent changes to the systems need to be taken going forward. I have outlined the interim changes that have been made In relation to the noble Viscount, Lord Waverley, I have hopefully outlined that the GSP system will be coming over and there is a big “Yes” for the eight countries.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-lords.u171	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-03	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Awaiting review for permanent changes	2019-10-03 00:00:00	2019-10-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	In the Minister’s statement, he rightly praised the work of the PSNI in Northern Ireland. He will know that the new Chief Constable of Northern Ireland warned just a week ago that any deployment by the PSNI to monitor checkpoints or cameras at or near the border would risk his officers being killed by dissident republicans. Can the Minister offer a guarantee to the people of Northern Ireland that that will never happen, that those officers will not be asked to patrol a hard border and that he will not be putting their lives at risk?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u403	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Smith, Owen	Risk to PSNI officers patrolling border	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons	I thank the Prime Minister for giving way, and I will give her a moment to get another cough sweet from the Chancellor. It is clear—we can see this from the Conservative Benches—that the Prime Minister is going to lose tonight, and to lose badly, which will drag this place, and jobs and businesses, over the edge, with the threat of a no deal. Is not the responsible thing to do now to seek an extension so that we can have some kind of way out of this calamity?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons.u274	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-12	Gethins, Stephen Patrick	Seek Brexit extension now	2019-03-12 00:00:00	2019-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords	I thank my noble friend for asking a very important question. Those children are particularly vulnerable when they come here, and people who would wish to exploit children have an ideal opportunity to do so when those children arrive. I can assure my noble friend that local authorities—which are, of course, the corporate parents of these children—are doing all they can to ensure that they do not go missing and, when they do, to ensure their safe return. I cannot give her numbers, but I will try to write to her if I have those numbers.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-11-lords.u34	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-11	Williams, Susan	Protecting vulnerable children arrival	2019-02-11 00:00:00	2019-02-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons	As a planet and as a country, we stand at a crossroads. In the month of Extinction Rebellion, Greta Thunberg’s visit to our country, and countless emails and conversations with constituents, we must ask whether we will use those interventions as a much needed wake-up call to take the urgent action we need. Alternatively, will we just make more excuses to create further delay and brush our country’s future under the carpet once more We all agree that we need a cross-party approach to this crisis, but looking at this Government’s record I fear that they are leading us down the path of excuse and delay. They have banned onshore wind subsidies, they are axing Labour’s solar panel subsidies, and their attempts to reduce emissions have stalled Then we come to the Government’s fracking policy. Fracking is a dangerous, disruptive and disastrous method of fuelling our country. It extracts fossil fuels at the expense of our environment and our communities, and the environmental risks from fracking to former coalfield sites are clear, so in Leigh we have expressed our total opposition to it—it does not have our consent, and the Government should follow Labour’s lead and ban it. In my constituency, the site of one former colliery is now a renowned 200-hectare country park and nature reserve, where over 230 species of bird have been identified. I suggest that sites such as that have been of greater benefit to our town than any fracking site could ever be. Rather than turning to the energy of old, we should be looking at how we reduce our emissions and help people to make greener choices. That starts with bringing railway stations back to our towns All this does not have to be burdensome; it can be full of hope, opportunity and positivity. But we must get on and act—the next generation is watching and judging.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-01-commons.u410	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-05-01	Platt, Joanne Marie	Act on climate crisis now	2019-05-01 00:00:00	2019-05-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons	I am also running the London marathon this weekend, Mr Speaker. Residents and businesses in Thornaby in my constituency are becoming increasingly concerned about rising levels of antisocial behaviour. They see people on the street acting with impunity because the police simply do not have the resources adequately to police the area. I know that tackling ASB involves more than just police, but the community I represent does not feel safe and needs serious Government action. Can the Leader of the House help me to get it?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons.u354	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-25	Williams, Paul Daniel	Requesting action on Thornaby ASB	2019-04-25 00:00:00	2019-04-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-lords	The noble Baroness is quite correct to suggest that the issues of psychiatry recruitment are complex. They are not simply a matter of funding; the Government have put a large amount of money behind mental health. It is not just a question of places—a large number of vacancies are available in psychiatry; it is one of the employer brand. The employer brand around psychiatry is not where we would like it to be, and safety is a difficult and challenging issue to address. We are focused on that. The campaign by the Royal College of Psychiatry addresses this very issue, and we will continue to work on it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-lords.u24	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Bethell, James	Psychiatry recruitment issues complex	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords	There is clear evidence of the important role of work in reducing child poverty. I acknowledge that we are in very difficult circumstances, but the Government are doing everything they can to ensure that people can be supported through this difficult time. Huge amounts of support are available. We have a £30 billion plan to support, protect and create jobs, and a £2 billion Kickstart scheme; we are doubling the number of work coaches; there is an expanded youth offer; the work and health programme is being expanded; and we are increasing participation in our sector-based work academies. In addition, there is £150 million to boost the Flexible Support Fund to make sure that people can be given support—and this money will filter into the lives of children.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-15-lords.u16	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-15	Stedman-Scott, Deborah	Government efforts to reduce poverty	2020-07-15 00:00:00	2020-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-commons	The fact remains, and the Minister has not rebuked the point I made in Committee, that the stronger nudge managed to get successful appointments to move from 3% to 11% of cases. That is not a significant improvement. A stronger nudge is just not going to be enough, which is why we argued during the passage of the 2018 Act for an opt-out guidance system. Now we are back to looking at this again. We still support that approach and new clause 1 would deliver it Colleagues, including my hon. Friends the Members for Perth and North Perthshire (Pete Wishart), for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Alan Brown) and for Gordon and the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), have passionately and eruditely explained why we have given such a focus to the so-called plumbers’ pension amendments in new clauses 4 and 5. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response to the compelling arguments that my colleagues have made, but he should be reminded that these new clauses were arrived at with the support of campaigners who feel that the current legislation does not protect them. After hearing what my hon. Friends have said about the impact this has had over many years on their constituents—and presumably after some lobbying from across the House, because at least 30 colleagues have constituents who are impacted, including, according to the campaigners, the hon. Members for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) and for Moray (Douglas Ross) and the Secretary of State for Scotland—the Minister must surely be eager to do something Before the Minister speaks, I wish to point him to the correspondence he should have received last week from the director of Plumbing Employers Action Group Ltd., which should allay his fears about new clause 4 setting a precedent, or about passing on liabilities to other employers, as has already been outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Gordon. It is worth remembering, through all this, that these plumbers have found themselves in this situation through no fault of their own, but because of a lack of information from trustees regarding their potential section 75 obligations. I hope that new clauses 4 and 5 can be accepted to ensure that nobody falls into bankruptcy and poverty through no fault of their own Our new clause 2 would help the UK Government in three areas. It would establish an independent advisory commission to look at the terms of this legislation. The Minister knows that it has been a long-term SNP policy to see an independent pensions and savings commission established. The scope of the Bill does not allow us to go that far, but this advisory commission could eventually become the standing commission we wish to see and a sounding board for long-term pensions and savings policy. It would ensure, for instance, that we never saw a repeat of the WASPI scandal In the meantime, new clause 2 would also allow the UK Government out of the bind that they find themselves in over commercial dashboards and financial transactions. We believe, as do many stakeholders in the industry, that the rush to see commercial dashboards with financial transactions could be extremely damaging. The hon. Member for Amber Valley has highlighted that risk The Minister has previously suggested that commercial dashboards are necessary to allow the independent public dashboard—the MaPS dashboard—to work, but that can only be the case if a deal has been done with the sector to allow commercial dashboards with transactional ability in exchange for the data that the providers have for the public dashboard. The Government could quite easily mandate that data to be provided without the incentive of early commercial dashboards and the risks of financial transactions. Time is the wisest counsellor of all, which is why I do not understand the Government’s determination to plough on without taking stock, without analysing the risks and without ensuring that savers do not suffer detriment from shifting so quickly to commercial dashboards and financial transactions We want to see the MaPS dashboard established quickly to provide impartial and reliable information for savers, and that is why we have brought back amendment 8 to reinsert the wording from the Lords that was removed in Committee. This has cross-party backing and backing from stakeholders. The public dashboard has the ability and the potential to be as revolutionary for pensions and savings as auto-enrolment has been, but that can only be the case if the Government get behind it and give it the space to develop. Also, the commission could help with what Members on all sides repeatedly turned to in Committee—namely, finding cross-party consensus on long-term pensions policy. This could be a safe space for those discussions and ensure that pensions policy stood the test of time, because there would be buy-in from all sides Our amendment 7 deals with open DB schemes. We have worked extensively with other parties to try to find a form of words to give the scheme providers comfort that they were not going to be forced into making investment decisions that were inappropriate for them. The importance of this has already been highlighted by the hon. Members for North East Fife and for Gloucester (Richard Graham) , as well as by my hon. Friend the Member for Gordon. There is a major concern that open DB schemes will need to de-risk, and there are potentially serious implications for them of doing so. In Committee, the Minister stated in response to one of my lines of questioning: “I want to make it clear again—I have said it once, but I will say it again—that the Government are not proposing to introduce a one-size-fits-all funding standard”. ––[Official Report, Pension Schemes Public Bill Committee, 5 November 2020; c. 81. ] However, the CBI has contradicted him by saying: “The regulator’s proposals risk moving back to one-size-fits-all regulation…Businesses and trustees need to be confident that the new code will allow them to make decisions that benefit savers and the long-term health of companies. ” The Minister protested strongly about the Government’s intentions; it may not be their intention to introduce one-size-fits-all regulation, but the Minister is reckoning without the law of unintended consequences. In order to be sure, why not allow a safeguard to be on the face of the Bill to protect against the unintended consequences, identified by the CBI and others, which could otherwise see perfectly healthy DB schemes close down?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-16-commons.u305	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-16	Gray, Neil Charles	Support needed for pension amendments	2020-11-16 00:00:00	2020-11-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-lords	My Lords, it is good to hear that there is now an acceleration in the number of groups applying to be community sponsors, but—as I understand it—community sponsorship is currently available only to refugees who come through the various vulnerable people schemes. At the moment it is not being used as a model for those who apply for asylum in the UK and are successful in being granted refugee status. Can my noble friend outline whether there are any proposals to make sure that this model is used in future for those granted refugee status in the UK? If not, we run the risk of a two-tier system.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-lords.u24	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-25	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Expand community sponsorship model	2019-04-25 00:00:00	2019-04-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-11-commons	We have put £40 million into the global and domestic efforts to find a vaccine, and the work got under way fast. That work is progressing, but it takes time not just to develop a vaccine, but to ensure that it is assured and safe to use. It is in the nature of these things—because of incubation periods and the nature of the science—that it does take time.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-11-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-11	Hancock, Matthew John David	Funding vaccine development efforts	2020-02-11 00:00:00	2020-02-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-21-commons	Our plans for future farming policy are set out in the Agriculture Bill. At the heart of our new policy in England will be a system that pays public money for public goods, rewarding farmers for enhancing animal welfare, improving soil health and creating habitats for wildlife. We are also introducing measures to support investment in farm productivity and to improve fairness in the supply chain.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-21-commons.u68	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-21	Eustice, Charles George	Agriculture Bill farming policy outline	2019-02-21 00:00:00	2019-02-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-lords	My Lords, I think the noble Lord is perhaps testing the patience of the House by his constant interruptions. The noble and learned Lord had indeed sat down. I do not think that it is right that the noble Lord should raise another issue. He is entitled to raise purely points of clarification.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-lords.u155	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Taylor, John	Stop constant interruptions	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	Today is Windrush Day, and I hope the Secretary of State will join me in paying tribute to all those from BAME backgrounds who teach in our schools and are staff in our schools. Has he read the letter I sent him, signed by Members from across this House, asking for a review of the curriculum in the light of the Black Lives Matter movement, so that it better represents all communities across the whole of our country?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u134	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Moran, Layla Michelle	Windrush Day curriculum review request	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-lords	My Lords, nearly 40% of payments are still in cash. Does the Minister recognise that although the payments regulator cites post offices as places where one can get cash, they tend to close at 4 pm or 5 pm? People need access, and 1 kilometre is far too far away to keep any local community functional in the way that it needs to be.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-03-lords.u13	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-03	Kramer, Susan	Cash access issues persist	2019-04-03 00:00:00	2019-04-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords	My Lords, we now come to the group beginning with Amendment 11. I remind noble Lords that anyone wishing to speak after the Minister should email the clerk during the debate and that anyone wishing to press this or anything else in this group to a Division should make that clear in the debate Amendment 11	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-lords.u187	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-24	Morris, Patricia	Amendment 11 debate guidelines	2020-11-24 00:00:00	2020-11-24 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons	Liverpool incidence rates have increased quickly and we are now on the precipice of local lockdown. There has been an increase of 247 cases on the previous week’s figures and the latest weekly rate in Liverpool is now 120 per 100,000, as the Secretary of State mentioned. What additional resources does the Secretary of State plan to provide to Liverpool and other local authorities to assist them in dealing with further localised outbreaks?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-21-commons.u151	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-21	Johnson, Kim Marie	Liverpool infection rates rising rapidly	2020-09-21 00:00:00	2020-09-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons	As had been said, I appreciate the constructive way in which the Minister is responding to the debate. Alongside the barriers that people with ASCs have to the workplace, they are also, sadly, more likely to be exploited. One of my constituents was affected by unpaid work trials in B&M Stores. In light of this debate, I wonder whether the Minister might consider the Government’s position to oppose the 10-minute rule Bill from my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Stewart Malcolm McDonald) to ban exploitative unpaid work trials, so that people with autism and Asperger’s, such as my constituent, are not exploited in such a way again.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-commons.u426	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Gray, Neil Charles	Ban exploitative unpaid work trials	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	I agree with the shadow Home Secretary that this legislation fills a gap. It is a really important, sensible, sound and sober piece of legislation that meets a need and builds on our existing tried and tested relationships with valued partners across the globe. It is limited in scope and tightly focused, and the amendments passed in the other place to ensure that people should be brought to a judge as soon as possible are incredibly sensible, understanding the geographical nature of our country and addressing clause 39 of Magna Carta—no imprisonment without due legal process The Bill addresses a real need to get people off the streets as quickly as possible. The most interesting part of the Bill has been that most extradition seems to revolve around chance encounters; as the Minister said, 60% of people just happen to be stopped in traffic incidents or other minor legal infractions. I am particularly glad that this legislation will enable us to get those people to speedy justice, rather than allowing them to slip through the net for something that might not have been a crime that they would otherwise be arrested for. I am also glad that it does not change any safeguards in our extradition practices; that is a fundamental underlying principle of this legislation. As the legislation only applies to people whose crimes would lead to a sentence of over three years, and is considered a serious offence in the UK, there are quite clearly sensible safeguards in place to protect people This piece of legislation is not before time, and I welcome the fact that speedy extensions can be made to new countries via statutory instrument with the appropriate safeguards in place, rather than having to go back to primary legislation. I support the Bill and look forward to its speedy passage through the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u226	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Holden, Richard John	Support for sensible, necessary legislation	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-05-commons	The hon. Gentleman I think might have now spoken for the last time in this Chamber and we wish him well in whatever he does next. Maybe, like Tony Benn, he will retire from the House of Commons and go into real politics; we shall see. He asked whether there are examples of unsuccessful interference in British politics, and the way that the Kremlin has behaved is clear; we have seen examples overseas of attempts at electoral interference, and of attempts at fake news and disinformation, most recently in Georgia. What I would say is that we have robust systems in place in this country to defend ourselves against such attacks, and that is why I say that such attacks have not been successful.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-05-commons.u168	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-11-05	Pincher, Christopher John	Goodbye, robust defense systems work	2019-11-05 00:00:00	2019-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-24-lords	My Lords, Operation Stovewood is a victim-focused investigation carried out under a strategy known as the survivor pathway, with a dedicated team of independent sexual violence advisers. In addition, when taking forward the consideration of prosecution, the CPS has regard to the victims’ code and to guidance on how it should approach and deal with victims in that context. Over and above that, we have the statutory provisions of Sections 16 and 17 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, whereby victims and other witnesses who are vulnerable or potentially intimidated can have their evidence taken by video recording and be cross-examined via a television link.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-24-lords.u41	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-24	Keen, Richard	Victim-focused investigation and support	2019-01-24 00:00:00	2019-01-24 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-commons	I want to speak in this debate today not just as a proud Welsh Labour MP but as a former teacher and a single parent We once again find ourselves in a position where a high-profile campaign has forced an embarrassing U-turn from this Government—a U-turn that will benefit thousands of children from some of the most disadvantaged homes. I want to echo the sentiments of my colleagues in recognising the work and dedication of Marcus Rashford in forcing this change of policy. He is exactly the kind of role model I want for my son—even though my son is a Man City fan—and for all the children in my constituency of Gower and in Wales I started my teaching career in the autumn of 1997 at Standish Community High School in Wigan. I saw at first hand the impact that a Labour Government had on lifting children out of poverty. When I later returned to teach in Wales, it was obvious that the wellbeing of pupils was at the forefront of the decisions made by the Welsh Government. I am proud that making sure that all children in my school did not start the day hungry was a priority for the headteacher and governing body of Bryngwyn School in Llanelli, where I last taught. They were inclusive, caring, and looking to provide for all pupils who came into their care. This is not something new in Wales. But until today’s screeching U-turn from this Government, children in England would have been losing out on support that they desperately needed. I am proud that kids in receipt of free school meals in Wales will always have that support from a Welsh Labour Government The challenges faced by these children and their families across the UK during the holidays are many: the cost of extra meals, finding free extra activities, and worrying about not being able to afford the uniform or the right shoes, school bag and equipment. I know that feeling of dread very well. It is not just parents of children on free school meals who need help and support—it is also working parents on low incomes, single parents, and all those recently affected by covid-19 Since becoming an MP, I have focused in my community on supporting parents and children in Gower over the summer period. My office and I, like many Welsh Labour MPs, have run schemes to recycle uniforms for local schools, put together back-to-school bags, and made and distributed packed lunches over the summer holidays. We work together with the Welsh Labour Government and Labour-led Swansea City Council, who make huge contributions every year to helping families in Gower and across Swansea. We create and give that extra support for those families, and it goes beyond just free school meals. It is also very pertinent to note that the level of support in Wales is significantly higher than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. An allowance of £19.50 per child, per week, is £4.50 more than in England and up to £9.50 more than in some Scottish council areas. This can make a huge difference to these families and to the feeling of worth of these children But what message does it give to our children when the Secretary of State for Transport said this morning that there are more important things than feeding schoolchildren, or when the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions tweets Marcus Rashford making a flippant comment and then attempts to correct it, while other Conservative Members demean Marcus’s own personal life experiences and the experiences of others like him? The lack of empathy and inability to relate to the problems families are facing across this country is endemic among Conservative Members. Really, how can a Government be so tone-deaf to an entire country? There are Members in this House who will have known the challenge of putting food on the table. Many of us are driven by our own life experiences to help people—to pull them up the ladder and not to push them down I would like the Government to recognise what the Welsh Labour Government have put in place. On that point, I am proud that a Labour Government in Wales are committed to prioritising the wellbeing of our future generations. Although I am pleased that the Government have reversed their position, it does prompt the question, why did they not think our kids were worth it before?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-commons.u510	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-16	Antoniazzi, Antonia Louise	Praising U-turn, criticizing government's priorities	2020-06-16 00:00:00	2020-06-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-commons	I can assure my hon. Friend that London will come out at the tier that is necessary and appropriate based on the public health evidence. What matters, as my hon. Friend says, is the case rate and the case rate among the over-60s, as well as the direction of travel in both of those, and then, of course, the percentage of tests testing positive—because if we put more tests in, we do not want to punish an area for having a higher number of positives—and the impact on the NHS. Thankfully, in London, the NHS has performed remarkably in this second peak and has coped with it, despite the pressures, admirably well.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-23-commons.u223	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-23	Hancock, Matthew John David	Appropriate tier based on evidence	2020-11-23 00:00:00	2020-11-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	My hon. Friend is making a compelling case for why the Government should announce specific support for the social care sector. I noticed yesterday that the Chancellor did not make specific reference to the social care sector which, as my hon. Friend points out, is in a fragile state and under enormous pressures. Is it not time for specific support for the social care sector to be announced?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u193	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Johnson, Diana Ruth	Support social care now	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons	The Secretary of State has mentioned that both the R rate and the level of new cases are important factors in determining the Government’s decision making, but will he clarify whether the way in which those factors differ throughout the UK will be considered in future planning, including in respect of financial-assistance programmes?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons.u250	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-18	Lake, Ben Morgan	Consider regional R rate differences	2020-05-18 00:00:00	2020-05-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	PC	Plaid Cymru	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	The last speaker from the Back Benches will be Greg Smith. I know that many Members who have waited to speak this afternoon will be disappointed, as quite a large number have not been called. I must point out that all the people who have not been called are those who have spoken many times in recent weeks. I am sure that a little arithmetic will show that with the number of Members there are, 650, and with the amount of time that we have to debate every day, which is eight hours, it is actually not possible for most Members of Parliament to make more than one speech in a week or several speeches in a month. It is not possible and it is not normal.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u507	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Speaking time constraints	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-23-lords	My Lords, I wish to speak to Amendment 269 standing in my name and that of my noble friend Lord Wigley Brexit has returned significant powers to the UK Government to negotiate and agree international trade agreements with other nations. As a reserved power, it is the responsibility of the UK Government to represent the interests of the agriculture sectors throughout the UK, including those within the political boundaries of devolved Administrations To ensure that agriculture businesses in Wales have access to equal opportunities in relation to trade as counterparts in England, it is reasonable to assume that any devolved Administration, responsible as they are for their own agriculture policy, support and monitoring, would share any information necessary with the UK Government in relation to trade. Enabling, where reasonable, the sharing of information to support trade policy and enable the free flow of tradable commodities within and beyond the UK should surely be considered a common-sense matter Large areas of rural Wales are heavily dependent on the agriculture sector as their primary economic industry. The symbiosis of agriculture and trade should be a priority; these policy areas must work together to ease the short-term economic shock and longer-term adaptation to new markets that will arise from the UK’s new trading arrangements. It is not an area where political wrangling should overrule what is most beneficial to the people and livelihoods of those affected on the ground As food has become a global commodity, the UK does not have the land area to compete on a volume basis with larger developing nations where agricultural production is increasing year on year. However, due in no small part to the structure of the CAP, the agriculture sector in the UK, and Wales in particular, produces agricultural outputs at a commodity scale where the amount of land available would indicate that a focus on higher-quality outputs rather than quantity would be more beneficial Generally within the UK, but more specifically in Wales, where legislation such as the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act (2016) are steering the nation to deliver against sustainability goals, there is a growing and marketable evidence base around the value of the sustainable production of food products. This provides significant potential for agriculture producers in Wales not only to promote our current high standards for animal health and welfare but to move into the added value, niche world of “sustainable brand values”, with the potential that this brings to extend into new international markets. Such standards and brand values would demonstrate that a foodstuff grown in Wales was produced with all due consideration for its impact against every aspect of sustainable food production and the sustainable management of natural resources. Businesses in Wales are already starting to look at the potential such a USP could deliver To deliver a trade policy that complements Welsh farmers and food businesses, it is essential that the UK Government not only adheres to our existing high standards when negotiating trade deals involving agricultural produce but opens wider avenues for those within the UK whose ambition reaches beyond our current understanding of food standards, to open new and exciting markets. I hope, therefore, that the Minister will indicate the Government’s acceptance of the substance of this amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-23-lords.u269	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-23	Hain, Peter	Ensure Welsh agriculture trade opportunities	2020-07-23 00:00:00	2020-07-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons	Let me unpick that question. There have been extensive discussions with EU leaders, but not on the issue of extending article 50. The extensive discussions have been about the concerns that the House has expressed about the backstop. The Prime Minister has had conversations with the German Chancellor Merkel, Prime Minister Rutte, Donald Tusk, President Jean-Claude Juncker, President Macron and of course, as I said in my statement, with the Taoiseach. There have been extensive discussions with European leaders, but they have been about getting assurances in line with the House’s concerns.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-commons.u268	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Brexit backstop discussions with EU	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-commons	The right hon. Lady was of course part of the Joint Committee and has an impressive track record on this issue. I have very much appreciated the work that we have done together on these issues. I can give her that assurance. It is clear that all parts of the joint jurisdiction need to be adequately represented. The Joint Committee was chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller), who did a wonderful and important job. I want to put on record my thanks to her and all the other members for what they have done. The Government have taken on board many of the Committee’s helpful recommendations, and the Bill is better as a result of its work. I am conscious that we have yet to respond to a small number of recommendations, but we will provide an update during consideration of the Bill in Committee.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-02-commons.u200	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-02	Buckland, Robert James	Bill improved by Joint Committee	2019-10-02 00:00:00	2019-10-02 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons	There used to be a scurrilous rumour in the House that when a Minister got advance notice of questions, it was perhaps the work of the Whips Office tipping them off. I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his courtesy, because he actually emailed me his questions half an hour before Question Time—he has always been a courteous fellow, but this morning he has exceeded himself. Never mind “buy one, get one free”, this is a four-in-one question In his letter, the right hon. and learned Gentleman listed a number of issues. Because he sent the letter ahead of Question Time, the first of them has already been addressed by the hon. Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), who asked about GATT. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman will know, there is a difference between what is possible and what he may argue is probable, but it is a distinction that the candidates have addressed As for side deals and cherry-picking, again there is an inconsistency. I have been asked by the House on a cross-party basis, following what is referred to as the Costa amendment, to seek a side deal with the European Union to protect citizens’ rights, and I am happy to do so, but there is that inconsistency. The House has called for me to reach out to the European Commission, as indeed I have, because I agree with the House that it is right to protect citizens’ rights, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman says that side deals are cherry-picking and should not be sought The right hon. and learned Gentleman asked about technology. He will know that, in the Strasbourg statement, the EU itself has accepted that technology has a role to play on the border. Indeed, it stands ready to work with us as soon as the withdrawal agreement has been ratified. What is getting in the way of that is the Labour party’s consistent opposition to the withdrawal agreement—and that is because, notwithstanding the manifesto on which he stood, the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s true position is that he wishes us to remain in the EU. That is what his letter did not say, yet that is what he actually means.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-27-commons.u113	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-27	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Minister prepped for Question Time	2019-06-27 00:00:00	2019-06-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, but from previous questions from my hon. Friend the Member for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock) she will be aware of Russian influence. We know that that influence is happening and has happened. Many of us worry that we are not well enough organised to identify it. When can we get a coalition with GCHQ and security services that will reassure Members that interference, which we know is going on, can be stopped?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u150	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	Sheerman, Barry John	Stop Russian interference	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this point. Integrated health and care systems are very much the way forward if we are to deliver the future of adult social care that we all want. The long-term plan for the NHS was developed in tandem with the adult social care Green Paper and has already shown some of the innovations that we think will make a massive difference, such as the roll-out of the enhanced health in care homes model.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-commons.u96	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Dinenage, Caroline Julia	Integration essential for future care	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons	The House has grown accustomed to the outraged tone of the hon. Gentleman, but it does not actually reflect the balanced tone of the judgment. He said in his questions that this country had been found in breach of international humanitarian law. I find that outrageous, coming from the official Opposition of this country, and I hope that he will retract it. I think the record will show that that is completely untrue. It is an outrageous slur on this country The hon. Gentleman raised a number of valid and important questions, and I shall try to take them in turn as best I can. He asked about open licences. They are subject to the same scrutiny, and sometimes take between two and five months to pass, so they are not a means of bypassing the scrutiny set out in the consolidated criteria. I think that the House will be clear on that. As to how we look at existing licences, and at licences elsewhere, I have made it clear that we will review all licences in the light of the Court’s judgment. It is worth noting, however, that the Campaign Against Arms Trade did not seek an order to suspend licences, and that the Court has not ordered that in its judgment The hon. Gentleman asked about how the UK monitors international humanitarian law allegations. The Ministry of Defence monitors incidents of alleged IHL violations arising from airstrikes conducted by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen using all information available. This in turn is used to determine an overall view on the approach and attitude of the coalition. It informs the risk assessment made under the licensing criteria, where there is a clear risk that the items to be exported might be used in the commission of a serious violation. We consider a range of information from Government sources, foreign Governments, the media and international non-governmental organisations. We are now carefully considering the detail of the Court of Appeal judgment and its implications for this risk assessment and for decision making. The hon. Gentleman asked about our discussions with the Germans. We of course have ongoing discussions with our European partners, but let me be clear that we are following the consolidated guidelines and the common EU position on this. I can tell him that there has been no breach in the duty of care in how the Government have approached this, and I make no allegations about any colleague, but I am not surprised that the hon. Gentleman has tried to drag personalities into this serious debate on such serious international issues. If there has been a breach of duty in this House, it is the breach of scrutiny by the Opposition.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons.u278	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-20	Fox, Liam	Opposition's outrageous slur rebuttal	2019-06-20 00:00:00	2019-06-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for the action she is taking. I have some specific questions about what she said. Can she confirm that the second opinion she mentioned will come from a doctor with an appropriate understanding of the safety and effectiveness of these drugs, and that it will be available to all patients in the same situation? Secondly, she mentioned the British Paediatric Neurology Association’s interim clinical guidance, which was made very much as a snap judgment straight after the rescheduling last November; in effect, it just said, “No, no, no”. Can the Minister encourage the BPNA to consider further the massive amount of evidence from abroad and produce more considered guidance? Thirdly, she mentioned the 80 prescriptions for CBD medicines, but that does not strike me as making much progress, because you can get CBD legally on the internet; the only advantage of such prescriptions is getting the drug for free. The issue concerns medicines containing THC, which are the ones that patients desperately need. Finally, the Minister will probably find that trusts are stopping doctors who would like to prescribe these medicines from doing so. Getting the NICE guidance a lot sooner than next autumn would probably encourage trusts to allow their employees to do so. Can she encourage NICE to hurry up, please?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-lords.u56	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-09	Walmsley, Joan	CBD THC prescriptions and guidance	2019-04-09 00:00:00	2019-04-09 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-commons	I am grateful to the Minister for his tolerance. What advice do we give to the family from Norwich whom I mentioned who are spending well over £1,000 on just three weeks’ supply of cannabis oil for their son with epilepsy through a private prescription? They simply will not be able to afford to carry on, so what should they do?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-03-commons.u316	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-03	Lamb, Norman Peter	Cannabis oil affordability concern	2019-07-03 00:00:00	2019-07-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	No, I am going to make progress Farming would also be badly hit. The National Farmers Union has been clear—I think it set this out this morning—that the proposed tariff regime would be a disaster for UK agriculture, stating that “everything must to be done to avoid a no deal Brexit, and the catastrophic impact this could have on British farming. ” I am not quoting the voices of politicians here; I am quoting the voices of those in the field in each of these areas Finally, as if the Transport Secretary has not struggled enough already, imagine how he would deal with a no-deal scenario, which would bring chaos to transport. Hauliers would face hours of delay as new checks would be put in place at borders, and family holidays could be jeopardised by a no-deal Brexit as British travel companies lose their current access and rights.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u450	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Starmer, Keir	No-deal Brexit harms farming, transport	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons	With respect, I will not give way as I have done so many times and I am aware of the time pressure with many Members wishing to participate in this debate We need support that is targeted to the sectors of our economy that have been hardest hit by the virus but are critical to our country’s economic future; to areas of the country that are subject to local restrictions because of this Government’s failure to get a proper grip on the health crisis; and to businesses that would be viable in ordinary times, employing people doing jobs they love, but just need a little more help to get through this crisis. These are people like those I spoke to over the summer in north Wales working in advanced manufacturing. They do not want a permanent handout from Government, just more support while the economy is still in dire straits to help them get back on their feet. Without that support now, jobs like theirs will take years to come back. Jobs in the supply chain linked to their plant will vanish too, and with them the economic prospects for their communities I called on the Chancellor to be more flexible when he gave his summer economic statement in this House two months ago. What do we get instead? A panicked handout of £1,000 bonuses to any business, anywhere, that brought back a furloughed employee. That is too much public money to dole out to a business that was going to bring back workers anyway. The Chancellor allocated £9.4 billion for that bonus scheme. Let us just imagine how much more effectively that money could be spent if only he had thought flexibly about how to respond to the crisis. Let us imagine how many of those at-risk jobs could be saved. The economic reality simply does not support the approach the Chancellor is taking, and he should have the courage to recognise that and change course The Chancellor may not wish to take our word for it that a targeted, flexible form of wage support is the right way to go, but he could at least be persuaded by the examples of other countries, such as Germany and France, which have each extended their schemes to last for two years; the Netherlands, which has extended its scheme for a further nine months; or Australia and Ireland, both of which have committed to support furloughed workers until March next year. Of course, in our own United Kingdom the devolved Governments have called for targeted wage support to be continued, not snatched away at the same pace across all sectors of our economy If that is not good enough for the Chancellor, he could listen to trade unions or think-tanks—after all, he trumpeted working with trade unions to create the furlough scheme in the first place. He could listen to the TUC, which has proposed a job retention and upskilling scheme; the Institute for Public Policy Research, which has advocated a coronavirus work sharing scheme; or the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which has suggested a covid-19 job support scheme If that is not compelling enough, perhaps the Chancellor could heed the voice of business. The British Chambers of Commerce has said that “businesses across the UK are going to need further support to weather uncertainty over the coming months. ” Make UK has called for “an extension of the Job Retention Scheme to those sectors which are not just our most important but who have been hit hardest. ”	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons.u150	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-09	Dodds, Anneliese Jane	Call for targeted economic support	2020-09-09 00:00:00	2020-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-commons	I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Department has Cabinet representation. I just make the point that trade can be and is a key driver for economic growth. It triggers positive changes in a country’s economy, which helps raise incomes in the poorest countries, creates job, lifts people out of poverty and helps countries to move beyond trade dependency.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-04-commons.u12	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-04	Adams, Nigel	Trade boosts growth and income	2020-03-04 00:00:00	2020-03-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-16-lords	My Lords, the Minister says there has been no cost to the taxpayer, but the taxpayer has had to pay £500 million extra, including the early closure of these contracts, which cost £170 million, which in turn included a cost of £115 million for waiving some fees. Is it not the case that there is an extra cost of £500 million to the taxpayer for bringing these contracts to an early close, and that they have not performed?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-16-lords.u114	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-16	Scriven, Paul	Taxpayer cost £500 million extra	2019-05-16 00:00:00	2019-05-16 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	Whatever the result of the power struggle in Libya, the priority of our Government will still be to work towards compensation for the victims of Semtex supplied by Libya to the IRA. I welcome the appointment of William Shawcross to look into the whole issue, but will my right hon. Friend assure the victims that it will not be sidelined, and that the Government will continue to pursue it to ensure that justice is done and compensation is paid to those who suffered so horribly at the hands of the IRA?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u298	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Rosindell, Andrew Richard	Justice for IRA victims	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords	My Lords, I associate these Benches with the very warm wishes sent in the direction of the noble Lord, Lord O’Shaughnessy, in his future endeavours We welcome the publication of the long-term plan today. It is a very important document. It will take time to absorb all its contents and we on these Benches would welcome an opportunity to debate it in more detail. Yes, there is a lot to welcome in the plan, particularly the focus on prevention. We welcome the focus on children and young people’s services and particularly the inclusion of issues relating to people with learning disabilities. But there are many concerns about how this plan will be put into effect. The workforce plan will have to work a lot better than any of the existing workforce plans, particularly if we are to be successful in retaining existing NHS staff as well as recruiting new staff and getting NHS staff to return, feeling that it is possible to work in more flexible ways. It will require a much more creative staff plan than we have at the moment Of course it is good news that we will focus on prevention rather than cure, but will the Minister clarify the precise funding mechanisms that would allow that to happen, particularly the role of NHS England, Public Health England, and local authorities in this new world? Will she also confirm the role that pharmacies will play in the public health agenda and the funding mechanism for that? Also, when will the Green Paper on social care be published? It is critical to the agenda that is being set out. I particularly welcome the £2.3 billion set aside for mental health services as part of the long-term plan. What is vital now is that everyone in the NHS, local authorities, schools and employers work together to deliver these plans and ensure that that money gets to the front line. Will that money be ring-fenced I take a particular interest in children and young people’s mental health. We are told, and it is welcome, that there will be a new emphasis on crisis care and a new single point of access or crisis hotline delivered through NHS 111 and with that, we are told, all children and young people experiencing mental health crises will be able to access age-appropriate crisis care 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That is to be welcomed. But will the Minister say whether that new crisis care service, which I wholeheartedly support, will be part of or separate from the adult 24/7 community-based mental health crisis response service, which is also contained in the plan? Will it also include 24/7 availability of CAMHS assessment in all A&E departments in hospitals up and down the country?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-07-lords.u131	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-07	Tyler, Claire	Long-term NHS plan; concerns raised	2019-01-07 00:00:00	2019-01-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	With a £1.3 billion maintenance backlog, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, which includes St Mary’s, which serves my constituency, faces the largest challenges in the country and has been waiting for years for the approval to go ahead with the St Mary’s development. In recent years, we have seen the Grafton ward closed because of significant structural concerns, with the loss of 32 beds; a ceiling collapse in Thistlewayte ward; the Paterson centre flooded; and floods, electrical issues and drainage issues commonplace across the whole estate. Can the Minister guarantee me that today’s announcement will mean no repeat of these sorts of problems in St Mary’s in the coming months, and how does he feel it will be better served by the £200 million deficit the trust has and the £120 million deficit in our local clinical commissioning groups?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u140	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Buck, Karen Patricia	NHS Trust maintenance backlog concerns	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons	First, I declare that I am a member of the Backbench Business Committee. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Brent Central (Dawn Butler) for bringing this debate to the House today As the representative of Leicester East, one of the most diverse constituencies in the country, it has been extremely concerning to see the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus on African, Asian and minority ethnic communities. This was proven by the Government’s own report, which they shamefully published only after repeated pressure, and which does not outline any protective measures to deal with the disproportionate impact of covid-19. In a constituency like mine, which has a significant number of people from the affected communities, I worry about the processes of tracking, testing and so on, and whether that will be put right, because we can imagine what impact a second outbreak would have on such constituencies The Office for National Statistics has found that black people are 1.9 times more likely to die of covid-19 than white people, people of Bangladeshi and Pakistani descent are 1.8 times more likely to die, and people of Indian descent are about 1.5 times more likely to die. Those figures reflect the severe racial disparities in our economy We already know from a Resolution Foundation think-tank estimate that black, Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi employees experience an annual pay penalty of £3.2 billion. Analysis from Public Health England shows that once in hospital, people from African, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds are also more likely to require intensive care. Those communities accounted for 11% of those hospitalised with covid-19, but 36% of those admitted to critical care Many have tried to dismiss the imbalance in deaths as being explained by cultural or even genetic factors. I have been dismayed by some of the information that has come through my inbox about what people need to do to tackle these genetic problems. Yet discrimination is not about that; it is deeply ingrained in the social, political and economic structures of our economic system. The scourge of institutional racism results in unequal access to quality education, unequal access to healthy food and unequal access to liveable wages and affordable housing, which are the foundations of health and wellbeing. That is the context in which the coronavirus crisis is operating. The virus itself may not discriminate, but our economic and social system certainly does Existing racial and class inequalities coupled with inadequate Government support mean that working-class communities, migrants and African, Asian and minority ethnic communities are at greater risk from exposure to covid-19. The severe racial disparities in our economy mean that those communities are more likely to fall through the cracks in the Government’s financial support and therefore more likely to be forced to work in unsafe conditions. A decade of cruel austerity has deepened the racial and class inequalities that exist in our society. Last year, a UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur reported on discrimination in the UK. We know that one of the grim findings was: “Austerity measures in the United Kingdom are reinforcing racial subordination. ” NHS staff are at considerable risk from the virus, as we know. It is vital that we repay the extraordinary contribution of frontline workers with a permanent extension of migrant rights. That means an end to the hostile environment. That means shutting detention centres and ending them, and it means granting indefinite leave to remain to all NHS workers, to carers and to their dependent families. Recent reports indicate that migrant NHS workers and carers are still being charged for using the health service that they work in. That is despite the Government saying that they would end that As the inspiring crowds of protesters across the country have shown in recent weeks, it is crucial that we in the UK do not assume that we are immune from the disease of institutional racism. The failure of the Government to outline any protective measures, despite being evidentially aware of the disproportionate impact of covid-19, is yet another instance of the institutionalised neglect of African, Asian and minority ethnic communities.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-18-commons.u314	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-18	Webbe, Claudia Naomi	COVID-19 impact on minority communities	2020-06-18 00:00:00	2020-06-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	Project Tempest is delivering and investing in a future fast jet programme. However, given what we are hearing about the potential closure of Brough, may I ask what conversations the Secretary of State is having with BAE Systems about replacement training jets, and what investment he is planning to make in some new Red Arrows?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u95	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Smeeth, Ruth Lauren	Inquiry about BAE Systems investments	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords	I return to the question of girls’ education in the Statement. As it happens, last week I was visiting the tiny east African country of Burundi, and one of the most impressive pieces of work that I saw there was with adult women who had not had education when they were girls and who have now gone through literacy and financial and business training and were running small businesses in their local rural communities. I welcome the fact that more money is being put into the education of girls and of children in countries torn by conflict, because Burundi is one such. Will the Minister explain a little more about how that might be put into practice, particularly in a nation such as Burundi—and there are others—where at the moment there are restrictions on the Foreign Office giving it money because of its internal conflict, and will she promise that DfID will be able to put money into such countries through this kind of system?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords.u143	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Butler, Paul	Support education funding in conflict zones	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	BI	Bishops	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords	My Lords, we welcome this draft instrument. It contains lots of positives, as we made clear when we debated the issues before, including the additional questions on military service, which is of course particularly pertinent in this week of commemorating VE Day, although of course before VJ Day. We are also aware of the millions who have served since then We are also pleased to see the voluntary questions on sexual orientation and gender identity, together with that on Roma people. Indeed, Roma people are now the most disadvantaged in the country, so it is encouraging to see their inclusion as a crucial step forward in data collection and the resource allocation to their community. I look forward to the Minister’s answers to the questions raised by my noble friend Lady Whitaker. However, the addition of that tick box in the ethnicity section brings us to the one contentious issue today: the lack of an equivalent tick box for Sikh people in addition to that in the religious option I have read the debate held on this issue in the Commons and listened carefully to the Minister’s introduction today, and two questions remain unanswered. First, why exactly was that recommendation decided on by the ONS, given, as we have heard, the recognition by the House of Lords of Sikhs as an ethnic group back in 1983, the 83,000 writings received in the last census, and the feedback received from over 100 gurdwaras? This is not necessarily to say that the ONS got it wrong and I assume that it had good reasons. However, neither its report nor the White Paper have convinced either the federation or the MPs representing Sikh areas. In her response in the other place, the Minister failed to explain that, so perhaps the noble Lord, Lord True, can make a better fist of it today. It is vital for the confidence of the Sikh community in the outcome of the census Secondly, and vitally, if it is the case that 12% of Sikhs, which represents 50,000 or more people according to ONS modelling, could be missing from these datasets, and given that it is on the basis of the census that it is ethnic rather than religious data on which 40,000 public bodies decide on the allocation of resources and use it to assess their responsibilities under equalities legislation, as touched on by my noble friend Lord Dubs, how will the Government ensure that suitable corrections are made so that this large and vital community gets its fair share of appropriate services and is not discriminated against through the absence of proper data How do the Government plan to address the inequalities that we sadly see in Sikh communities while we lack accurate data? Do they recognise that the chronic statistical underreporting of communities such as the Sikh population could allow discrimination to go unnoticed? Indeed, will the Minister comment on the point raised about the Scottish Government’s decision to add a prompt for Sikhs as well as for Jewish people to their own regulation We welcome the census because in this time of rapid social change we welcome the availability of up-to-date information. Indeed, as I warned the Minister earlier, I will shortly start campaigning, no doubt along with the noble Lords, Lord Balfe, Lord Naseby, Lord Bourne, the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, and my noble friends Lord Dubs and Lord Clark of Windermere, to ensure that we do not lose this vital source of rich, granular data in 2031. For the moment, however, we need all sections of the community to have faith in the census, and the Minister’s answers to the debate today will be important.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-12-lords.u129	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-12	Hayter, Dianne	Concerns over Sikh ethnicity representation	2020-05-12 00:00:00	2020-05-12 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-commons	I know that very high-quality lamb is produced in the hon. Lady’s constituency. In fact, I have visited the Rhayader sheep market and seen it for myself. I can assure her that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is working with the Treasury to make sure there is support for lamb farmers in the eventuality of potential issues. However, we also need to open up more markets for British lamb. I have particularly got my eye on the US market—it is the second largest importer of lamb by value in the world—and we need to make sure that Welsh lamb farmers have more places to which they can export.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-commons.u42	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-17	Truss, Elizabeth Mary	Support for lamb farmers	2019-10-17 00:00:00	2019-10-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons	I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. He was a wonderful Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, and he actually gets the situation in Northern Ireland. Does he agree that what really perturbs us about the opposition to the Bill tonight is people saying that it will somehow attack peace when what it does is remove the impediments to economic progress? It is through economic progress that we have created more jobs in Northern Ireland and helped to create peace in Northern Ireland.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-14-commons.u310	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-14	Paisley, Ian Richard Kyle	Support economic progress in NI	2020-09-14 00:00:00	2020-09-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons	Of course, across London there is a huge amount of travelling to work. Although of course in different boroughs the rates are different—my hon. Friend is absolutely right about that—and in his patch they are lower than the London average, nevertheless, unfortunately, they are rising sharply. We considered a borough by borough approach, but because of the integrated nature of London and because, unfortunately, cases are rising fast across London, we decided that the best approach is for the whole of London to go into level 2 together.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-commons.u281	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-15	Hancock, Matthew John David	Unified London COVID approach	2020-10-15 00:00:00	2020-10-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons	The hon. Gentleman is quite incapable of keeping quiet, even for a moment. His agitation and his degree of excitement may be slightly theatrical on this occasion On the ISC, as always, that will be set up in due course. It would be wrong to be “Russian” these things—[Laughter]—as I am sure the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz) appreciates. [Interruption. ] No, it was not, actually; it was quite deliberate On the Cumberlege review, I actually gave evidence to that review in relation to Primodos. This is an opportunity for me to pay the greatest tribute to the hon. Member for Bolton South East (Yasmin Qureshi), who has campaigned absolutely tirelessly. I first met the hon. Lady when we were both elected in 2010 and had offices opposite each other, and she took up this issue when nobody else was really interested. She has transformed people’s thinking about it, and I look forward with great interest to what Baroness Cumberlege has to say about Primodos. It is a very important issue Going back to some of the other questions, the right hon. Member for Walsall South is a kind and generous person, and her sympathy for Cabinet Ministers having to queue is much appreciated by my right hon. Friends, who have to take on these onerous things which are otherwise unknown across the country. Our constituents never have to queue for anything because life is so smooth and easy, but she appreciates that right hon. Ladies and Gentlemen having to queue is so burdensome and tough, and makes us realise that we are really earning our living as we stand in a queue. Remarkably, it takes almost exactly the same time to pass through the Division Lobbies as it does when we are using the Lobbies without social distancing. The speed with which we got through them earlier this week was pretty much the normal speed and therefore things are working: Government business is getting through and scrutiny is taking place. I am not as kindly or as soft-hearted as the right hon. Lady, and I think a Cabinet Minister queuing for a few minutes is no bad thing, and probably spiritually enlightening and uplifting The right hon. Lady referred to renters who have lost income. Emergency provisions were made: £1 billion has been made available to help people who are renting. The Government are very conscious of the need to protect people who are in the private rented sector The right hon. Lady also mentioned the Prime Minister not making a speech in the House, but making it outside the House. However, the Prime Minister came to the House just a week before and made a statement. We are having a statement on Wednesday next week from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Government have been assiduous in maintaining the ministerial code’s requirement to make major announcements to the House first, and this is part of the natural process of government.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons.u157	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-02	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Hon. Gentleman's behavior; government updates	2020-07-02 00:00:00	2020-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons	We are making funding available to upgrade ports, as the right hon. Gentleman said. I hope he would acknowledge that, as a result of the Government’s work on contracts-for-difference auctions, we have the biggest offshore wind industry in the world, which has driven down prices significantly and made offshore wind viable. We will continue to work to support those jobs, and we are talking about tens of thousands of extra jobs in the sector by 2030.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons.u23	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Sharma, Alok Kumar	Offshore wind investment creating jobs	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-lords	More is the pity—of course a Speaker should be elected. We should have an Assembly and an Executive up and running in Belfast, but I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Alderdice, whose experience in these matters is enormous, that it is not going to happen. However, this short debate is important to deal with the issues in the current Act—and to do so at the time we are debating it I have huge sympathy for noble Lords who have spoken about the issues that should be devolved, whether the sensitive issues of abortion and equal marriage, victims’ pensions or the university in Derry. These are all hugely important, of course, and people have different views on them, but I did not spend three years of my time chairing the talks on strand one of the Good Friday agreement, setting up the Assembly and Executive, not to agree with devolution. These things should be for the devolved Assembly and Executive, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay, rightly said that is the only solution to this. It is a great pity that they have not been set up before today, because those issues would then be before the Assembly and Executive in Belfast—but it has not happened Looking at the events of the past 24 hours, I suppose one thing has changed with regard to how the Government deal with Northern Ireland. It was good to see the Taoiseach and Prime Minister in Cheshire and to hear that they talked on the telephone last night and that relations between Ireland and the United Kingdom are beginning to get better. But one of the tragedies of the past 1,000 days is that the British and Irish Governments could have come together more frequently, maybe delegated by the other 26 members of the European Union. I am convinced that had that happened, the two Governments would have been able to deal with the detail currently being dealt with and the talks would have been more serious than they were. The talks should have had an independent chair and involved all parties equally, and the two Prime Ministers should have bothered to go to Belfast more, because frankly it was farcical when they did. They made only day trips to Belfast, and you just cannot produce results like that. However, I hope they have learned how you can do things from the last week I make no comment on the deal other than this. If it eventually goes through, it is partly a result of the Irish and British Governments having actually started talking to each other properly. They are the co-guarantors of the Good Friday/Belfast agreement. It is an international treaty lodged with the United Nations and should have been treated as such. We have had 1,000 wasted days with no shape, no structure and no form to the talks, but I am optimistic about the present Secretary of State. He is working extremely hard with his counterpart in Dublin and the political parties in Northern Ireland—which, at the end of the day, are of course key to all this I hope Sinn Féin decides that it will engage in proper discussions with the DUP on setting up the Assembly and Executive. I know the DUP plays a hugely important role in all these matters, but I remind your Lordships that it is only one side of the story. In all the arguments about consent we have listened and are currently listening to, both sides in Northern Ireland have to agree. The principle of consent—that you had to get them to agree—was the genius of the Good Friday agreement. I hope that is embedded in any deal There is some optimism about the restoration of the Assembly and Executive. If they are not restored, we will come back to this House time and again to deal with issues such as this, which should properly be matters for those elected in Northern Ireland. I still fear that the Good Friday/Belfast agreement has been seriously dented by the events of the past two or three years. It is a matter of great sorrow to me personally but, much more significantly, of great sadness to the people of Northern Ireland, who, quite frankly, deserve better.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-17-lords.u143	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-17	Murphy, Paul	Calls for revived Northern Ireland governance	2019-10-17 00:00:00	2019-10-17 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-02-commons	I congratulate the Secretary of State and our Government on their brilliant work to make sure that we were the first country in the world to have a vaccine approved It would be worth the Secretary of State’s repeating the criteria and pecking order for the 800,000 doses. A colleague of mine, Councillor Bentley, always says that people need to hear something at least eight times before they embed it, so will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to repeat it?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-02-commons.u239	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-02	Mohindra, Gagan	Vaccine approval distribution criteria	2020-12-02 00:00:00	2020-12-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords	Yes, I wish to speak to Amendment 20, which is part of the first grouping. I understand that the groupings are not binding. If the noble Baroness is suggesting that I make my speech now, I will take the opportunity. I am quite content to do so and thank her very much We hear much about the Northern Ireland Assembly deciding this by a majority of one, but we do not hear much about when the Northern Ireland Assembly decided by a very comfortable majority that there should be no change in the abortion laws in Northern Ireland. If it is important how the Assembly voted on same-sex marriage, is it not also important how it votes on every other issue, namely abortion? There were strong feelings expressed here on Wednesday about the manner in which the other place amended a Bill which was intended to change the date by which an election in Northern Ireland has to be called and made into a Bill that brings in sweeping reforms relating to abortion We know that abortion is a devolved matter; we know that the clerks in the other place had advised that the amendments were out of scope; we know that this Bill was subject to a fast-track procedure—making it wholly inappropriate to deal with such a matter as abortion; we know that in 2016 the Northern Ireland Assembly voted by a clear majority not to change the law in any way, and we know that a ComRes poll shows that 64% of the people of Northern Ireland oppose Westminster legislation for Northern Ireland on this matter, rising to 66% of women and 72% of 18 to 32 year-olds. We also know‘ that all the main denominations in Northern Ireland oppose any change in the law—the Presbyterian Church, which is the largest denomination, the Roman Catholic Church, the Methodist Church, and the Church of Ireland—as do all the minor denominations which, added together, would make one major denomination, probably the third largest Protestant denomination in Northern Ireland However, these things do not seem to be important. The Commons saw fit none the less to impose Clause 9 on this Bill. It has to be said, of course, that 100% of Northern Ireland MPs who take their seats voted against the provision. Quite apart from the substance of the issue, as a matter of procedural fair play it is hard to imagine a better expression of being treated beneath contempt. To really appreciate the significance of this, we must turn to the substance of the issue and recognise that abortion is a far more sensitive issue in Northern Ireland than in any other part of the United Kingdom; others have alluded to this. We must recognise that many people in Northern Ireland are very attached to our abortion laws; I might add that they are the most up to date of any region of the United Kingdom The Both Lives Matter report, which shows that 100,000 people are alive in Northern Ireland today who would otherwise not be, is hugely important. I realise that the Government have not created this problem. Their response, however, has the capacity to make things better or infinitely worse. The Minister suggested last week that there were some difficulties with Clause 9, but rather than acting as he should to moderate their effect, my reading of what he said was that the Government were interested in helping to rescue the provisions and possibly create a new power not based on Section 26. That would be wholly wrong because the amendment in another place that sought to create a new power—that is, new Clause 5—was not selected for debate and because the Government cannot introduce new offences without contradicting the Sewel convention. I am a wee bit disturbed today that there has been very little mention of respect for the Sewel convention.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-lords.u191	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-15	Morrow, Maurice	Opposing Westminster's abortion law imposition	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-lords	My Lords, I will also speak to the other amendments in this group. In some ways, I see this group as a continuation of the previous debate concerning the effect of the moratorium on pension funds and small companies. Amendment 23 inserts the prescribed part for unsecured creditors into the A18 priority. It should in fact have had an extra condition to it that said “when there is a pension scheme” but, in the amendment rush, that somehow got left off. Noble Lords will see that in the explanatory statement I did reference pensions as being of particular relevance This was an idea I had as part of the continuing story of the adjusted insolvency waterfall and the damage that can be done to pensions. My objective was to probe how else the prescribed part could not be diminished or how there could be some form of compensating balance. Another way could be by putting an extra or reserved part into the higher priority, designated as a first tranche reserved towards pension deficit, with any remaining pension deficit still sharing in the later general pool of the prescribed part. For example, if the prescribed part is raised to 30% so that there is more available in general for pension deficits, as other noble Lords have suggested, could the extra 10% be moved to be given a higher exclusive priority reserved for pension debt alone As I said before in the group on pensions, the Government have lifted the lid on changing priorities, and what has to date been accepted as an uncomfortable compromise regarding the position of pension deficit is now open to challenge. Why should there not now be some extra reserved part or special preference in the mix, especially given the point made more than once already that pensions really belong with wages and salaries? They should never have been demoted to unsecured creditors As a generality, I see the raising to 30% as beneficial, not just for making more available for pension deficits but also for SMEs. Irrespective of whether there is any changed priority as part of the compensating measures that one will have to start looking at, the rise to 30% —which has been proposed before—is given more impetus in the light of what is happening in the Bill. I beg to move.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-16-lords.u197	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-16	Bowles, Sharon	Pensions priority in insolvency scenarios	2020-06-16 00:00:00	2020-06-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons	I think the whole country celebrated when there was the announcement last week that antibody testing that fits the bill and does the job had been approved by our Porton Down labs. We are in the closing stages of commercial negotiations to ensure that those tests are widely available, and I will let my hon. Friend know just as soon as I can when that roll-out will be, but I do not want to prejudice the commercial negotiations, which I am sure he will understand On the second point, I strongly agree with my hon. Friend that this crisis has demonstrated just how important social care reform is, just how important social care is and how we must maintain the benefits and improvements in delivery and working practice that happened because of the crisis and happened through the heat of the crisis. We must maintain and strengthen that close working relationship. The financial changes that we put through have proved very effective at bringing the two systems closer together, but there is much, much more to do.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-commons.u180	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-05-18	Hancock, Matthew John David	Antibody testing approved reforms needed	2020-05-18 00:00:00	2020-05-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons	That is fair enough, although the campaigning had gone on for years. I think back to the jubilee debt campaign, the trade justice movement and the Make Poverty History campaign, which mobilised tens of thousands of people on to the streets of towns and cities across the United Kingdom. In many ways, the climate change protest—there was one here last Wednesday—is the successor to those movements. Now is the time to tackle climate change. If we do not, the progress towards the SDGs and MDGs is likely to go backwards, which is not in anybody’s interest. Those movements mobilised churches, trade unions and different parts of civil society. That sentiment still exists, and although it is quiet now, the hon. Gentleman is right that if there was a serious threat, that noise would make itself heard, just as it did in the days of the Gleneagles summit and the years after We have discussed how the DFID estimate is not the entirety of the 0.7% target and how we need greater scrutiny of other Departments that spend money that is counted towards it. Incidentally, the UK Government conveniently count towards it the money that the Scottish Government spend on international development, even though it is additional. Taxpayers in Scotland pay for DFID through their taxes and the Scottish Government, with cross-party support dating back to the time of Jack McConnell, choose to use a very small amount of their own budget to provide additional and often very innovative support, particularly through the grassroots links with Malawi, which I will say a bit more about shortly Ministers are aware of concerns that I and other Members have about the occasional double counting of money towards two separate targets: the 0.7% target for aid and the 2% for military spending. Some money is counted towards both targets. Ministers stand up and say, “Well, we don’t mark our own homework. It just so happens that the money is counted by the ODA and NATO and there’s not much we can do about it”, but if the money is being used to hit both targets, one of the budgets must be losing out. If they are committed to the targets, the Government should make an effort to meet them both independently. If they happen to spend a bit more, that’s fine, since both targets are minimums, not maximums. I hope the Minister will take this opportunity to reiterate her and her Department’s support for the aid budget, under the current definition and amount, and for the Department remaining a standalone facility, because, despite what some Government Members have said about how they do not know where the talk is coming from, the talk is real. The outriders for the Tory leadership campaigns, particularly the former Foreign Secretary, have made it clear they think there is political capital to be made from undermining or changing the role of DFID and its budget Aid is not a tool of soft power to be used as some political lever. It should be dispensed on the basis of need and in pursuit of internationally agreed objectives, such as the SDGs and the Global Fund—and I join others in welcoming the announcement about the replenishment of that fund. When Government talk of aid working in the national interest, the question I always put back to them is: how is meeting the sustainable development goals not in the national interest? How is the national interest different from tackling global poverty and climate change? Even from a self-interested point of view, if we want to stop the migration of people, we need to give them reasons to stay in their home countries, and access to a good education and nutrition and not having to run away from major climate disasters are very good reasons—if that is the perspective we want to take I want to touch briefly on the importance of the Government learning from and engaging with civil society actors. I mentioned the Scotland Malawi Partnership. I declare an interest because it provides secretariat support for the all-party group on Malawi, which I chair, and which has issued an outstanding invitation to the Secretary of State, lasting as long as is left to him, to meet the group and member organisations of the Scotland Malawi Partnership The hon. Member for Wrexham (Ian C. Lucas), who is not here, at the last DFID questions raised the idea of DFID undertaking an exercise of mapping links between local civil society organisations and counterparts in developing countries to see the added value that civil society groups in the UK bring to development. That would be worth the Department pursuing in the near future. In Scotland, the Scotland-Malawi people-to-people model suggests that more than 208,000 Malawians and 109,000 Scots are actively involved in the links between the two countries, while a 2018 paper from the University of Glasgow reckoned that 45% of people in Scotland could name a friend or family member with a connection to Malawi Here is an opportunity for a ministerial legacy. What more could the Government do to connect formal Government efforts with those of civil society—not just the large NGOs we are familiar with, but, as my hon. Friend the Member for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Dr Cameron) suggested, the thousands of churches, schools, hospitals, universities and community and diaspora groups involved in two-way partnerships—and not just engage with them, but fund them and encourage them to think innovatively The last piece of DFID legislation was the Commonwealth Development Corporation Act 2017. We recognise the important role that the CDC plays in leveraging private capital into development. I wonder what a “civil society” equivalent might look like. I know that Mr Speaker has not selected the amendments, but I think that the fact that amendments were tabled to the motions is an interesting indication of the way in which the estimates process is beginning to evolve. We welcome that, because when the “English votes for English laws” system was introduced, SNP Members were told that it would be through estimates that we could continue to scrutinise Government expenditure, particularly when Barnett consequentials were involved. I do not believe that they are involved in DFID funding—as I have said, Scottish Government international development funding is separate—but, nevertheless, this is our opportunity to engage in such scrutiny. Gone are the days when SNP Members were told to sit down because they were talking about estimates during an estimates debate The amendment tabled to this motion was intended to put pressure on the Government by asking them to clarify their position in relation to a no-deal Brexit, and to prevent that from happening without the full approval of the House. We know that Departments, including DFID, are being touched by Brexit preparations; we know that dozens of DFID staff are being sent to other Departments to help prepare for no deal. The destabilising effect that we are seeing across Government must be a matter of concern, and it is right for us to use debates such as this to raise it and to keep the Government on their toes Today’s debate has enabled us to highlight the importance of DFID, but it has also drawn our attention to the risk that the Department will be downgraded, the risk that Brexit preparations will weaken its capacity, and the risk that policy progress will be stalled because Brexit continues to dominate everything. I welcome our recent opportunities for scrutiny in the Chamber, but I wonder whether those opportunities are likely to continue beyond 24 July.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-01-commons.u309	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-01	Grady, Patrick John	Defend, scrutinize, and support DFID	2019-07-01 00:00:00	2019-07-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-lords	My Lords, let us not get distracted from the key issue here, which is that our A&Es are under enormous pressure. One reason is that people find it very difficult to see a GP, and that is why I think we can all welcome the announcement that we will see some more GPs. When might we see some progress on the ground?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-lords.u78	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-21	Fall, Catherine	A&Es under pressure, need GPs	2020-01-21 00:00:00	2020-01-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords	My Lords, I am grateful for the Minister’s response to this group of amendments. I will read Hansard in detail. Touching on the point of the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, it struck me as odd that we still seem to be referring to the current system under the CFP as some sort of gold standard we should seek to continue. I think most people would agree it is the exact opposite of what we are trying to achieve This concept of an economic link being proofed by the charitable donation of quota back to a deserving cause seems out of kilter with what we are trying to achieve. We should not give the vast majority of quota to a small number of players and then rely on their beneficence to give it back to those located in coastal communities who are actually fishing in our waters, employing people, feeding local markets and producing sustainable food. Something is a bit awry in the way that this opportunity is being interpreted by our Government. We will probably come back to probe this further as we go through the Bill, particularly on the quota allocation clauses, but I am grateful for the response—it will tee up an interesting debate later On whether recreational fishing could in any way contribute to the national benefit, it is a bit dismissive to state that only commercial fishing and fish stocks have any contribution to make to the benefit of the nation. It is clear that, if we are a destination for a large number of recreational fishers, that will be of national benefit. If we can sustain a really rich and biodiverse marine environment, that will enable us to encourage any manner of recreational activities—not just fishing but whale watching, porpoise watching and birdwatching are inherently linked to the sustainability of our fish stocks. Without fish in the seas, we do not have birds There are lots of reasons why good management of our marine environment produces a national benefit, so I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Jones, that this is a really odd phrase and that the narrow definition of “national benefit” needs revisiting as we go through the Bill. However, at this stage I am happy to withdraw this amendment.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords.u264	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-02	Worthington, Bryony	Revisiting national benefit definition	2020-03-02 00:00:00	2020-03-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons	Does my hon. Friend agree that this figure was challenged whenever it was put out? It was challenged the entire way to the court, and the court ruled that it is a defensible figure in terms of the laws in Northern Ireland. We may disagree very strongly on a number of matters. However, I can say very categorically that those people who strongly take a different position care just as much about women, but they also care about this issue. We should be respectful of that and the different views we have across this House.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-16-commons.u306	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-16	Little Pengelly, Emma	Respect differing views on issue	2019-10-16 00:00:00	2019-10-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons	The best thing we can all do for the institutions of our country and the respect in which they are held is to deliver on the mandate of the people and get Brexit done. [Interruption. ] If the right hon. Member for Islington North does not like the policy that I am embarked on, he is at liberty, even at this late hour, even at 9 o’clock, to go for a general election.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-25-commons.u854	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-25	Johnson, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel	Deliver Brexit mandate	2019-09-25 00:00:00	2019-09-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons	Recent weeks have proved the strength and vigour of Parliament, but it is now time to agree its will. It is time for us to establish what deal the House is for, to deliver certainty to our citizens and businesses and to offer clarity to the European Union. As we debate inside the Chamber, we should not lose sight of the fact that outside, the EU rightly expects us to continue to respect our shared values: to protect citizens’ rights, to honour our international obligations and to preserve the integrity of the peace process and avoid a hard border. That is a commitment that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister holds extremely dear Indeed, many Members in all parts of the House find much in the withdrawal agreement that is common ground. That is an integral part of bringing the country back together as we move forward in the national interest. However, many of the amendments simply prolong uncertainty and delay, despite the paradox that they were presented in a spirit of making progress in the delivery of certainty.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons.u609	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-29	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Need for parliamentary agreement now	2019-01-29 00:00:00	2019-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons	It is interesting; I believe the hon. Gentleman supports this Bill—I may be wrong—but on national security, the Government will apply some tests and we could apply some tests when it comes to our industrial base. Let me make this point to him: it is not just France, but Germany, Australia, Japan and the United States. It is all of the other major industrial economies that say, “Well, no, we do have a strategic interest in certain industries. ” Of course, if we decided to go down that route, we would have a debate in this House about the specific areas in which we wanted to be able to intervene. We would have to look at exactly the criteria, and it is not just about whim, but the question is: is the status quo adequate I say to the hon. Gentleman that the status quo is not adequate, and we do not just have 10 years or more of experience to suggest that the status quo is not adequate; we also have a real situation now with Nvidia and ARM. If anyone in the House wants to get up and say, “We think it is fine. We think this should just go ahead. We are not concerned about what that means for our tech sector”, then fine, but everybody I speak to in the tech sector who knows about this issue, including my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central, says that there is a real worry. Why have we not developed enough of these world-leading companies in this country? Why do we want to see ARM taken over?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons.u273	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-17	Miliband, Edward Samuel	Support for stronger industrial policy	2020-11-17 00:00:00	2020-11-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords	My noble friend the Minister made similar comments three months ago when my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot, to whom we all pay tribute, raised this subject. It is a disgrace. The Government, as my noble friend will agree, have both an actual and a moral responsibility here. Can he remember the old adage that “justice delayed is justice denied”?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-lords.u60	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-07	Cormack, Patrick	Government's moral responsibility emphasized	2020-09-07 00:00:00	2020-09-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords	I am sorry, I am unable to take any further interventions: I have already lost time and I really want to deal with the contributions, if my noble friend will forgive me. The noble Lord, Lord Mawson, gave a very interesting illustration from his own experience in the East End. It illustrates that our relationship is built on collaboration and partnership and is focused firmly on enhancing the security and prosperity of all our people. That relationship is thriving: we are each among the top four investors in the other’s economy and Indian companies have created 110,000 jobs in the UK. We have launched an ambitious technology partnership and the UK issues more skilled work visas to India than to all other countries combined. More broadly, 89% of Indian visa applications are accepted. That is what Prime Minister Modi appositely describes as a “living bridge” between us. Our personal, professional, cultural and institutional ties have shaped each other’s countries and give our relationship a unique depth This has been an important and helpful debate. I have listened with interest to the thoughtful and informed contributions from your Lordships. I am sorry that I do not have more time to address some of the specific points raised, but I shall read Hansard and endeavour to respond to your Lordships by letter if I have omitted to address points made To conclude, the Government wish to mark the centenary of Jallianwala Bagh in the most appropriate and respectful way. In deciding our approach, we shall certainly give full consideration to the points made by your Lordships today.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-19-lords.u195	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-19	Goldie, Annabel	UK-India strong partnership highlighted	2019-02-19 00:00:00	2019-02-19 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-commons	I thank Mr Speaker for allowing me to bring forward this debate on the National Trust in the year of its 125th anniversary, which is obviously coming to an end The National Trust is a fantastic British institution and an important part of our offer to international tourists. In many ways, the National Trust sets the benchmark for the high standard of our heritage and natural environment. Personally, I have a positive history with the National Trust, having served much of my apprenticeship as a Cornish mason on National Trust sites. It is that relationship, and the fact that I care about the National Trust, that brings me to the House this evening, along with the concern of many of my constituents I stand here to celebrate 125 years of the National Trust and to petition the Government and the National Trust to act to ensure that the National Trust does not lose sight of its core principles and charitable aims. It was this House that gave the National Trust its purpose: “The National Trust shall be established for the purpose of promoting the permanent preservation for the benefit of the nation of lands and tenements (including buildings) of beauty or historic interest and as regards lands for the preservation (so far as is practicable) of their natural aspect, features and animal and plant life. ” I recognise that responsibility for the National Trust, in all its functions and as it discharges its duties, will span several Government Departments, but I am glad to see a Minister from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport present to respond to this debate It is time for the Government and/or the Charity Commission to review whether the National Trust is behaving in a way that is consistent with its purpose. I say that because I see increasing evidence of the National Trust appearing to reach far beyond what people believe to be its purpose and function, acting at times as a completely unaccountable body that can make impositions on lives and livelihoods without any right to reply or recourse, having no concern for how long it takes to engage, even when individuals and businesses seek proactively to engage and appease National Trust staff It is right, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I inform you at this stage that I have written to the Charity Commission to set out my concerns and those of many of my constituents. There is reason to be concerned and I hope to set out this evening a few examples of why concerns exist Constituents in west Cornwall raise examples such as the trust proposing that landowners carry out activity, including the erection of buildings, on land that neither it nor the owner actually owns; house sales either falling through or prices being dramatically reduced because of obstructive interventions and/or delays by the National Trust; constituents waiting two and a half years for the National Trust to finalise a covenant; businesses being charged levies in return for National Trust consent to developments on privately owned land; the trust appearing to favour the promotion of holiday accommodation over the maintenance of small but important farms along the Cornish coast; blocking efforts to install renewable energy solar panels on privately owned agriculture buildings; having a disregard for local sensitivities, listed building regulations and basic planning processes; embellishing covenants, leaving owners stating to me that their grandparents, who agreed to covenants in good faith, would turn in their grave; and refusing to take responsibility for assets that are unsafe for the general public Only this weekend, I was asked: “Please could you ask the National Trust if it is still their policy to support small family farms? Or given their current financial crisis will they opt for the short term financial gain of holiday accommodation over the long term benefit of local employment and better husbandry of the land This is particularly important for your constituency where several National Trust tenant farmers have recently given notice to quit, leaving an opportunity for new, younger entrants into farming—an opportunity that the NT appears not to be taking. ” Should that be the case, it is completely contrary to the good work that the Government are doing through the Agriculture Act 2020 to support the introduction of fresh blood into farming and support the transition to younger generations.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-15-commons.u355	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-15	Thomas, Derek Gordon	National Trust's core principles oversight	2020-12-15 00:00:00	2020-12-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-lords	My Lords, of course I feel some relief—as anyone would—that we did not fall off the cliff edge of no deal, but I am not joining in the fanfare. Bill Cash compares the PM to Pericles and our EU membership to subjugation. I prefer Margaret Beckett’s word “salvage”, because this incomplete deal could have been done weeks, if not months, ago. It would have been just as incomplete then, but it would have satisfied the farmers, manufacturers, SMEs, students, musicians and many others whose livelihoods have been damaged, even wrecked, by the delays. What was all that about preparation? How can anyone be proud of setting up a massive lorry park against no deal, when it turned out to have a completely different and unexpected use in the pandemic? That was lucky, was it not The deal was, of course, cleverly announced by the Prime Minister on Christmas Eve with all the hallmarks of a gala, with the magician drawing rather small rabbits out of a top hat What is still not done? There is parliamentary scrutiny and financial services, and fishermen need more reassurance. Devolution is in a lot of trouble; the Schengen data is missing. We will lose Dublin III regulations for asylum seekers seeking family reunion. Gibraltar still has no deal. Then there is, of course, Erasmus. Like the noble Lord, Lord Ricketts, I feel the loss of that scheme almost personally, because it is founded on a great European scholar. The Turing scheme is fine, but its resonances are different. Some say that Brexit is all over, but there is, and will always be, a fundamental divide between those who see themselves as European and those who see Great Britain in a global context. I am not sure that the Government appreciate that the first group may already be a majority. I was brought up as a European in a post-war climate and, for me, the UK has always been in Europe. I agree with those who want a European family of nations, not a political union or a giant bureaucracy—we are going to have some of that ourselves. Of course, the EU has to be reformed and it has an equal right to a level playing field. Europe will still be here on 1 January. Because of our shared experiences, we will inevitably have a closer relationship in the future. Most people will want that in the course of time. Meanwhile, we cannot expect Europe to want us back.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-lords.u76	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-30	Montagu, John	Incomplete Brexit deal criticism	2020-12-30 00:00:00	2020-12-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-09-commons	In 2005, I was very unfairly arrested on a Europol red notice in Ukraine. I fully realise that the Government can do little, especially if this gentleman is accused of corruption, but will my hon. Friend ensure that Mr Taylor gets as much support as possible in Croatia—and Monaco, if he goes there—from the British Government?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-09-commons.u145	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-09	Stewart, Robert Alexander	Support Mr Taylor abroad	2020-11-09 00:00:00	2020-11-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords	My Lords, I had a great involvement with housing in London, particularly as a member of the Greater London Council. More recently, I spoke in favour of converting unused offices for residential use to reduce homelessness, particularly in London. Since then, assessments have indicated that some of these converted offices are too small to provide ideal accommodation because, although toilet facilities are usually available, there is often not enough space for a full bath or shower room. In view of the acute housing needs, can more suitable use be made of these potential home spaces? Will the Minister ensure that it should be a legal recommendation that any conversions or extensions under the regulations will meet, or exceed, appropriate living standards for the 21st century It is good that the Government are working on so many new assessments and improvements, and the quality of new homes, as stressed by the noble Lord, Lord German, is of importance, without any doubt. I support the continuing attendance to this question as one of the many that face us today.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-lords.u191	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Gardner, Rachel Trixie Anne	Ensure quality housing standards	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-lords	My Lords, I do not understand when the Minister says that musicians, for example, will be treated exactly the same. If they are going to be treated as though they are from non-EEA countries, it will be a massive change; it will not be the same at all. The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, was absolutely right to mention reciprocity. Of course, what we will do to the EU will be done to us. From the point of view of the creative industries, which are so important culturally and economically, it is hugely disappointing to see in paragraph 25 of the policy statement: “We will not be creating a dedicated route for self-employed people. ” The effect on our own UK workers will be devastating if there is not a dedicated route, unencumbered by the need for sponsorship and allowing onward movement, among many other things, not only in the arts and the creative industries but in the UK services sector more widely, for which Europe is the major market.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-lords.u107	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-02-25	Trench, Nicholas	Creative industries require dedicated route	2020-02-25 00:00:00	2020-02-25 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	Measures to improve air quality are a key part of the Environment Bill, and we have engaged with stakeholders through the development of these measures to ensure that they are ambitious and impactful. We are confident that these measures, including the commitments to set two air quality targets, will deliver real benefits for air quality, and we will continue to engage and collaborate with stakeholders, parliamentarians and the public as we work to implement these measures.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u23	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Clark (Pow), Rebecca Faye	Improving air quality measures	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons	I am grateful to the Deputy Prime Minister for coming to the House at this very late hour to give us as much information as he has. Both sides of the House have complained that there will not be enough time to consider the motion. We do not actually know what the motion is, but I understand that it will be taken at 7 o’clock tomorrow and there will be no protected time. We will not have had time to have considered the legal advice, so may I make a suggestion to the Deputy Prime Minister? In his previous answer, he said that negotiations have been going on until the last minute. Would it not be better to have a statement from the Attorney General tomorrow, a statement from the Prime Minister tomorrow and the debate the following day? This is one of the biggest votes that we will have, and it is ridiculous that Parliament should be bounced into it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons.u576	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Bone, Peter William	Insufficient time to consider motion	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-12-commons	Three lines later in my script, I was going to do so, but I am happy to do it now, and the hon. Lady is absolutely right. I think it is hugely significant when the captain of the England cricket team is prepared to stand up against this kind of abuse—because it is abuse, not part of the game of cricket—and call it out in the way that Joe Root did. We should absolutely recognise him for that, just as we should recognise Raheem Sterling, Nicola Adams, Danny Rose and so many other elite athletes for the dignity they have shown in the face of appalling provocation Discrimination should never be seen as an occupational hazard. After all, for sportsmen and women, our arenas and stadiums are their place of work, so they cannot be left to deal with this alone. Nor can they be expected just to put up with it in a way that nobody else would be expected to at their place of work There has been a widespread debate about the best way to respond to discriminatory abuse from spectators during a match. My view is that, if players decide they want to stay and respond with their skills on the pitch, we should support them in that and have huge respect for their resilience and professionalism. However, I also strongly believe that players at any level should not suffer any disadvantage, penalty or sanction if they choose to make a stand and walk off the pitch. We should respect those decisions, too Football has a protocol in place that advises referees to stop, suspend or abandon a match if discriminatory chanting takes place, and it should be followed. Football authorities must also give serious consideration to what sanctions are needed if clubs fail to demonstrate zero tolerance, whether that means significant fines, stadium closures or points deductions Partnerships across sport and across civil society are vital if we are to address this issue, because eradicating discrimination from sport is a challenge that affects all fans, all clubs and all governing bodies. The Government are supporting a number of different anti-racism initiatives, including the Premier League’s No Room for Racism, Show Racism the Red Card and Kick It Out campaigns, all of which have achieved much in this area. We recognise that other forms of discrimination, such as homophobia, antisemitism and sexism, can be prevalent in sport, so we are working with a number of bodies, including Stonewall, Maccabi GB and Women in Football, to ensure that all discriminatory behaviour and cultures are challenged in local, national and international sport. We are bringing together everyone with an interest to discuss a way forward. In February, the Minister for Sport and Civil Society brought together administrators, campaign bodies, fan representatives, players and managers for a landmark summit. It was agreed that there was a number of ways in which improvements could be made, from support for match stewards to improving incident reporting. Only through the combined efforts of local police forces, clubs and stewards will these offences be picked up and dealt with in the appropriate manner. We are planning to announce a series of next steps before the end of the summer.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-12-commons.u524	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-12	Wright, Jeremy Paul	Eradicating discrimination in sports	2019-06-12 00:00:00	2019-06-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-lords	My Lords, I apologise for rushing my Question. The Gambling Commission reports that the number of problem gamblers is now 430,000—an increase of more than 100,000 since 2012—and that the number in danger now exceeds 2.3 million, including 11.5% of those who use machines in bookmakers’ premises: a 50% increase since 2012. In addition to any measures to control the industry, what steps will the Government take to inform and reach out to members of the public, especially those at risk, and to ensure that support, including medical support where relevant, is available to them?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-05-lords.u47	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-05	Beecham, Jeremy Hugh	Government action on gambling problem	2020-03-05 00:00:00	2020-03-05 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons	My hon. Friend will of course know that my brother Keith raced motorbikes. Sixteen years ago this August, he had a very serious accident. He came off his bike and was seriously injured both physically and mentally. It will stay with him for the rest of his life. He is still madly keen and interested in motorbikes. It is very important that we make the improvements my hon. Friend refers to, so that racing can continue on the roads of Northern Ireland.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons.u434	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-15	Shannon, Richard James	Advocate for motorbike racing safety	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-lords	I understand that. To ask to amend the agreement is one thing, but to tell them the specific alteration is another. I am very familiar with that particular Motion, which passed. The point that I am trying to make is that if you want to change a document, you should propose the amendment you have in mind. The amendment tabled—very wisely, if we wanted to get some agreement—did not do that. All it said was that we must get alternative arrangements. What alternative arrangements likely to be suitable? This point seems very important.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-lords.u109	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Mackay, James Peter Hymers	Propose specific amendment details	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords	My Lords, I will start with both thanks and apologies, because my two Front-Bench colleagues who would normally reply to this debate are not here—my noble friend Lord Rosser unfortunately has to be at a funeral, and my noble friend Lord Tunnicliffe has to be at another railway event which is part of his career in railways. Therefore, two experts unfortunately cannot participate, and your Lordships have me. My expertise on railways is rather limited, but I am keen on development, which is what this debate is absolutely about. I too thank the chair of the committee, the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, and the committee, for their excellent report, Rethinking High Speed 2. I welcome the noble Lord’s comment that rethinking does not mean stopping Rethinking is about planning. One of the things I have been pleased about in the debate is the understanding that you need to rethink constantly in any huge project because, to use the words of that famous American politician, Donald Rumsfeld, there are always known knowns, known unknowns and so on. You can carry on with it, but it means that you must review and adapt as a project develops. That has certainly been a key lesson from the debate I, too, stress the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer: this is not an either/or debate. This is not about choosing one aspect of rail transport over another. It is fundamental. As we heard, the northern powerhouse will succeed only with HS2. We need both. It is not vice versa We also need to encourage a strong shift from road to rail for both passengers and freight. I was extremely pleased to hear the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, and my noble friend Lord Faulkner emphasise this point. I remember when I first came into this Chamber the speeches of my noble friend Lord Berkeley on the importance of freight on rail. We need to focus on that added dimension to the debate Of course, the debate has also been about capacity. The west coast and east coast main lines are often at full capacity, which will only worsen as the population increases—a point highlighted by the noble Lord, Lord Mair, and other noble Lords. Our country has an issue with productivity and slumping economic growth. I am a firm believer that HS2 is a response to those issues that may provide a solution. Parliament must ask itself whether it is the most efficient solution This week, we read in the leaked report that HS2 could cost up to £106 billion, which far exceeds the £56 billion estimated in 2015. As an aside, I am a member of the Lords Finance Committee. Every single project that we have examined in relation to Parliament has far exceeded its estimated business case budget. There have been many reasons for that, not least that we are dealing with an ancient building; we need to ensure that we uncover all the things we need to address in renewing it. That point applies partly to the HS2 project, because as we proceed, we will find more and more problems. HS2 must provide value for money; at such a cost, it is unclear whether the Government will ensure that it does. It is true that the headline figure fails to take into account a benefit-cost ratio with wider economic impacts. Skills have been another key element of today’s debate. Someone said that the skills shortage is a reason for cancelling the project. Actually, the fact that we need to build skills in this country, and to ensure that those skills have an effect, is the reason for keeping it. As my noble friend Lord Monks said, it is extremely important that we maintain our capacity to build further infrastructure projects. Moreover, if the economic reports are true of returns as low as 60p, the Government have clearly failed to keep costs down and must make clear how they will do that as the project continues I totally agree with my noble friend Lord Adonis that the problem with so many projects in this country is their stop-start nature: will the project proceed? That is a risk in itself in terms of companies and others being committed to keep faith with a project and invest. I think my noble friend referred to the illusion of certainty. While it may be an illusion, that sense of certainty at the beginning of a project is how we build confidence, and as we uncover issues it is really important that we review. Reviewing is not a negative, it is a positive We have also heard about the environmental consequences, which I fully agree must be minimised. My noble friend Lady Young referred to reports from the Wildlife Trust of how HS2 could endanger 693 classified local wildlife sites, 108 ancient woodlands and 33 legally protected sites of special scientific interest. The High Speed Rail Group may dispute some of the figures, but we can all acknowledge that there will be some degree of negative impact on wildlife and woodlands. As the Government continue with HS2, they must be conscious of this and it has to be factored into the programme One policy solution which has been suggested as an antidote to these issues could be to lower speeds on the network. HS2 is due to be the fastest railway in the world, with potential speeds of up to 400 kilometres an hour. Trains are initially expected to run at least at 360 kph, but as has been mentioned in this debate, the French TGV and Japanese bullet trains both operate at 320 kph. If the line was slower, it has been argued today and in the report that the track would not have to be as rigid, greater flexibility would allow for the provision of different routes, costs could be reduced and some of the impacts on wildlife habitats would be avoided. However, in doing so, we do not want to compromise on the consumer appeal of the present estimated journey times as well as the status of tourism appeal, which has not been mentioned: it would be branded as the world’s fastest railway I was talking to my noble friend Lord Tunnicliffe about the projected costs when he was in his place. He was responsible for the Jubilee line extension. He felt that the costs would be exceeded, but they were working on a cost-benefit analysis that did not turn out to be the case. Traffic increased hugely on the Jubilee line, but that was not predicted when the initial decision was made. It is those things that we have to take into account. If the Government are to consider slower speeds, they must ensure that that is not done to the extent that passengers see no reason to use HS2 instead of the existing main lines. We have also heard the case for using a different London terminus, with trains stopping at Old Oak Common in north-west London. Many will exit at that station to use the interchange with Crossrail and consequently have faster journey times to their end destinations. It has been suggested that there is no need to continue on to Euston and that the line should terminate there. I have heard those arguments and I think that they need to be taken into consideration as part of the review. As we have heard, that could save up to £8 billion. The Mayor for London has made quite a compelling argument that termination at Old Oak Common would mean that Crossrail would be full by the time it reaches central London, which is another factor that should be taken into account. Of course, we lose out on the main advantage of rail compared with air travel—that it is from city centre to city centre. These considerations should be taken into account, but I re-emphasise that agreeing that these things need to be considered is not a case for halting this project In conclusion, I stress that, as my noble friend Lord Monks said, HS2 has the potential to revitalise our economy, contribute to ending climate change and solve the capacity issue that frustrates the main lines—but a project of such enormous cost must be of benefit to communities across the United Kingdom, not just to those in London and Birmingham. There are worrying reports that the line may serve only our country’s first and second cities. That would be an abject failure to deliver on the improved connectivity the Government have so long promised. I absolutely agree with my friend Andy Burnham that: “We cannot have a situation where there is a gold-plated railway service between London and Birmingham and a brass-plated one between the Midlands and the North. That will widen the North-South divide, not close it. ” It must be built alongside widespread electrification, the reopening of closed railway stations and the construction of new lines The issue at the moment is that many feel HS2 is an irrelevant project that will have no impact on their life, positive or negative. If we pair HS2 with wider improvements, we can use the project as a catalyst to revitalise our railways in a way that can regenerate communities, tackle climate change and boost our economy.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords.u167	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-23	Collins, Raymond	Support for HS2 project reconsideration	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons	I spoke last night to my opposite numbers from New Zealand, Australia and Canada, along with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, but that is the starting point, not the point of arrival. We have got to make sure we build this up into a broader groundswell. Working with Five Eyes and our European partners is important, but I have also spoken both to people within the Commonwealth and outside—I spoke to my Japanese opposite number this morning—and we must try to make this as broad a group as possible, based on a like-minded attachment to the principles of, and adherence to, international law.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-02-commons.u77	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-02	Raab, Dominic Rennie	International law adherence coalition	2020-06-02 00:00:00	2020-06-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons	The engagement with the devolved Administrations has been incredibly important in this so far, and will continue to be. Each of the devolved nations has a chief medical officer, and the team of the four CMOs is an incredibly important forum for making sure that the advice going to all four nations is clinically justified and correct. That has been working very well. Personally, I have spoken to the Ministers involved as well. We have a principle that we share information and publications before they go public, and thus far that has worked well. The hon. Member is right about the requests for equipment. We have sent out equipment to China, and we of course stand ready to respond to any further requests it has.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-03-commons.u248	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-03	Hancock, Matthew John David	Devolved administrations' cooperation in health	2020-02-03 00:00:00	2020-02-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-20-lords	Let me keep going and see how we do The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, raised the issues of whether the projects will receive the funding, depending on whether the EU decides to give it, and the timing. I am afraid that we do not know because it will depend on future negotiations. I assure the noble Lord that the Government stand behind these payments, which will be made in the circumstances that they are not received from the EU The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, also mentioned the present circumstances and the Government’s limited role. The Government have a limited role because it is often private companies making the bid. The Government are not part of the decision process because, as I hope I have already explained clearly, it is clearly set out in the regulations such that the regulations govern the decision process The funds that will be paid out, or are guaranteed to stand behind these payments from the EU, are “new money”, to use the terminology. They are not from existing DfT budgets The instrument provides the necessary powers for DfT, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to “operationalise” the Government guarantee and make payments in respect of CEF grants if these are not met by the EU in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a withdrawal agreement in place.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-20-lords.u148	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-20	Vere, Charlotte	Government guarantees funding post-Brexit	2019-05-20 00:00:00	2019-05-20 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons	The latest technical glitch in the Prime Minister’s so-called world-beating test and trace system, which has been dubbed a “data enrichment” process, has meant that many positive cases among students have automatically been attributed to their home address, instead of to their university address. That has affected about a quarter of new cases in Richmond upon Thames in my constituency, and it has been replicated in Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Hertfordshire, Essex and elsewhere. How can quick and effective local tracing take place if cases are being reported to the wrong place, and how might that affect decisions about which tier areas are placed into?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons.u376	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-12	Wilson, Munira	System glitch misattributing COVID cases	2020-10-12 00:00:00	2020-10-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-lords	My Lords, the noble Lord used the expression, “giving force”. If those principles are given force, it means that the Government treat themselves and put on the record that they are bound by those principles. That is what giving force would mean in those circumstances, because these are novel circumstances set out in the Bill. That kind of reassurance is needed with the data ethics framework.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-lords.u101	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-12	Clement-Jones, Timothy Francis	Government bound by data ethics	2019-03-12 00:00:00	2019-03-12 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-26-commons	The Government consulted on the ban on weapons ahead of the Bill and concluded, on the basis of evidence from the most senior counter-terror police in the country, that it was right to ban assault rifles. It was only in response to a Back-Bench rebellion led by the hon. Gentleman that the Government caved and made the exact opposite case to the one that they made on Second Reading These are very basic requests for what is, in truth, information that Parliament should already have when being asked to pass legislation. The parliamentary lock we are seeking to add to the orders should not be necessary, but we know the damage that can result from a lack of joined-up thinking in youth justice, and our communities simply cannot afford another misstep. That is why it is only right that parliamentarians are given the full facts before being asked to approve a further roll-out Turning to the content of the orders themselves, all of us in this place are united in our mission to do everything in our power to bear down on the terrible scourge of knife crime, but we must be wary of taking action for the sake of action. Interventions must be evidence-based, have a clear purpose and fill a gap in the existing legislation. The police already have a substantial suite of powers for those they suspect of possessing a knife. The issue is, and has been for several years, the ability and capacity of the police to enforce those powers. As the chair of the Police Federation has said: “How the Home Secretary thinks we have the officers available to monitor teenagers’ social media use or check they are at home at 10pm when we are struggling to answer 999 calls is beyond me. ” This Government have taken 21,000 police officers off our streets. Response times have rocketed, and in some force areas residential burglaries are rarely attended. The police’s capacity to respond to crime has been extremely diminished, so it is beyond doubt that they do not have the capacity to place orders on people who have not actually committed a crime, and then to monitor and implement those orders effectively. There has been no impact assessment of the resource implications for the police or any of the other services that may be brought in by these orders. We are concerned, and this is what our amendments speak to, that in trying to establish so-called wraparound care for young people, these orders will inevitably end up focusing on the restrictive elements such as curfews, social media bans and prohibitions, rather than the potential for positive, rehabilitative action. I think we have now reached consensus in this place that in order to combat youth violence effectively, a whole-system, cross-governmental public health approach is required. These orders could have been an attempt to bridge such a divide, but instead they place sole responsibility on the police as the only authority that can apply for an order, which risks narrowing the focus of the suite of options available. The fact that there is no statutory requirement to assess the needs of a child, establish their circumstances and consider the safeguarding implications of an order or their family history prior to an order being granted should be fatal for a legislative proposal that the Government have styled as a route to access wraparound services. It simply does not do what is required. That is why our amendments would establish a statutory requirement to consult with the YOT to produce a pre-sentence report. However, we are satisfied with the Minister’s commitment that this will be made clear in guidance Furthermore, I wonder whether the Government, in using the example of a youth worker as someone to be responsible for the delivery of an order, recognise the bind they would be putting such an individual in if they were responsible for reporting any breaches to the police. Central to a public health approach is a consistent, constant adult in vulnerable young people’s lives. This could provide an opportunity for that, but it cannot do so if such individuals are then forced to report them to the criminal justice system every time they do not abide by the conditions laid down in their order I will round off with a number of questions to which I hope the Minister will respond when she speaks again. The civil burden of proof is concerning, so what sort of intelligence does the Minister envisage would be sufficient for a court to grant an order? Will the police use the gangs matrix to target individuals? Will association with known offenders be sufficient for an order to be placed? Will past offending be sufficient, as the Minister in the other place appeared to suggest Does the Minister share the concerns of Members across the House that we risk criminalising children as young as 12 who have not actually committed a criminal offence? Does she really believe that a two-year custodial sentence is proportionate to a breach of a civil order, and can she give an example of when such a sentence would be appropriate? What exactly can KCPOs require or prohibit? Will guidance be brought forward on what measures are effective in tackling knife crime, or will it be anything that the court deems necessary, proportionate and enforceable Finally, who will be required or allowed to know that a child has an order, and what action will their school or alternative provider be expected to take when one has been granted? The implications for alternative provision are potentially severe, as some providers refuse to take children who have knife convictions, leaving them completely out of education and therefore much more vulnerable to becoming involved in violence. What consideration has been given to this I do not think that the Minister has satisfactorily answered the concerns raised by the Opposition in our amendments or those of expert organisations that work on these issues every single day, such as the Magistrates Association and the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers. We will therefore divide the House on our amendment (a) to Lords amendment 23 in relation to the parliamentary lock, as the report that the Home Secretary brings forward must be voted on before the pilots can be rolled out I conclude by thanking and congratulating my right hon. and hon. Friends who have significantly improved the Bill and subjected it to scrutiny during its passage, especially my right hon. Friend the Member for East Ham (Stephen Timms) and my hon. Friends the Members for Sheffield Central, for Sheffield South East, for Lewisham, Deptford (Vicky Foxcroft), for Croydon Central (Sarah Jones), for Birmingham, Edgbaston and for Slough. The amendments in our names have sought to strengthen and improve the weak legislation before us today. They have sought an evidence-based response to the long-term trend of violence that we are witnessing as a result of this Government’s austerity agenda. We hope that the Government will accept that much more needs to be done if we are to prevent any more young lives from being needlessly taken, and we hope that the Government will accept the amendments in our names today.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-26-commons.u392	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-26	Haigh, Louise Margaret	Opposing weak, contradictory government legislation	2019-03-26 00:00:00	2019-03-26 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	My right hon. Friend is right. In my previous role, I enjoyed a visit to her constituency to visit a prison with her and I am more than happy, although I am sure my officials will wince at the diary management involved, to take her up on her offer of a visit as well. She is exactly right: we are able to make this investment because, unlike the previous Labour Government, who left that note saying, “Sorry, there is no money”, we have stewarded the national finances well and we now have the money to invest.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u191	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Argar, Edward John Comport	Supporting financial stewardship investments	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-09-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I do accuse the Government of running down the clock, and it is a serious allegation. The article 50 window is two years—it is very short. The Government started the two years by having a snap general election, and lost two or three months. They then went through to the end of the phase 1 agreement, but it was not until June last year that we even had a Chequers plan, so the two-year window has in effect been run down. There is a question of the extension of article 50, which may well be inevitable now, given the position that we are in, but of course we can only seek it, because the other 27 have to agree The other serious question with which I have been engaging is about the appetite of the EU, after the negotiations have gone the way they have, to start again and to fundamentally change what is on the table. I have to say, with regret, that I genuinely think that the way the Government have gone about the negotiations, particularly in respect of the red lines that the Prime Minister laid down in the first place, has undermined a lot of the good will that would otherwise have been there.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-09-commons.u357	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-09	Starmer, Keir	Government mismanaged Brexit negotiations timeframe	2019-01-09 00:00:00	2019-01-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	Does the Leader of the House think it reasonable that named day questions asked of Ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care six weeks ago are not answered even when the Department clearly has the information sought or that letters written to that Department in May are replied to by civil servants, not Ministers, in October—in at least one case, after five months, the answer was to refer it to another Department? We know that that Department is under particular stress but this is an abuse of the rights of Members. Will the Leader of the House interrogate his colleagues and try to get better response rates than that?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u220	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Slaughter, Andrew Francis	Slow government response times	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-lords	In view of what the Minister has said, does he agree with me that it would be sensible to follow the example, set in Scotland, of having a presumption against short sentences? That does not interfere with the judiciary’s discretion but it confines it to the minimum of cases, where it is appropriate.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-lords.u44	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-29	Woolf, Harry Kenneth	Adopt Scotland's short sentence policy	2020-06-29 00:00:00	2020-06-29 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-commons	In my surgery on Friday, I met a family with very young children who have been without benefits to which they are entitled since before Christmas, due to mistakes by the DWP. They are already in housing rent arrears and reliant on the local food bank. Without resolving those errors, the DWP is now moving them on to universal credit, where the terrifying prospect of a five-week wait and no funds to repay an advance pose a real risk of homelessness. I want the Secretary of State not only to look into this case but to deal with the incompetence and cruelty in her Department, which are causing such misery for far too many people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-18-commons.u107	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-18	Hayes, Helen Elizabeth	DWP mistakes, universal credit risks	2019-03-18 00:00:00	2019-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords	My Lords, this Bill underpins the Government’s ambition to deliver a new framework on private international law which has real and tangible benefits for people and businesses in the United Kingdom Private international law is viewed by some as a technical and specialist area of law, but it is an essential one. Without private international law agreements, UK businesses, individuals and families would struggle to resolve the challenges they face when dealing with cross-border legal disputes. For example, these agreements can help small businesses which have been left out of pocket by a supplier based in another country to seek redress, or if a family relationship breaks down and one spouse moves abroad, they make it easier to sort out arrangements in the best interests of their children. These are sometimes difficult and challenging situations to resolve, but private international law provides a framework to do that for the benefit of all parties Of course, leaving the European Union does not halt cross-border trade, travel or family relationships that cross boundaries. These will endure and indeed grow in the years ahead, and where disputes arise, there continues to be a need for a framework to settle them in a clear, fair and predictable way. By helping to resolve cross-border disputes quickly, international agreements on the private international law framework help to reduce costs for UK businesses, individuals and families who become involved in them. These agreements also provide legal certainty for those travelling, trading or living abroad. They help avoid confusion by preventing multiple court cases taking place in different countries on the same subject and sometimes reaching different conclusions. They ensure that the decisions of United Kingdom courts and relevant competent authorities can be recognised and enforced in other jurisdictions. The Bill will allow us to implement these important and beneficial agreements in domestic law During our membership of the European Union, we helped build, develop and refine an advanced framework on private international law. Now that 31 January 2020 marks the first time in over 20 years that full competence in this area of law has returned to the UK, we must address it. Our task is to lead on building such a framework on a bigger scale in a global setting. We will begin by building on and cementing our role in international fora, such as the Hague Conference on Private International Law, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law and the International Institute for the Unification of Private International Law, with other global partners I turn briefly to the detail of the Bill, which has two main clauses. The first clause implements in domestic law three Hague conventions that the UK currently operates due to our previous membership of the EU. In other words, the EU is a signatory of those conventions on behalf of all its member states. We will become an independent contracting party to these conventions in our own right at the end of the current transition period. These three Hague conventions are widely supported by stakeholders in the legal and finance sectors and, I hope, by Members across this House. We need to ensure that these important conventions can continue to operate effectively in the future, so that businesses and individuals can continue to rely on their rules The first is the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition and Enforcement and Co-operation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children, which aims to improve the protection of children in cross-border disputes. It deals with issues such as residence of, and contact with, children whose parents live in different countries. The second is the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, which aims to ensure the effectiveness of exclusive choice of court agreements between parties to international commercial transactions. These clauses are common, particularly in high-value commercial contracts. Thirdly, the 2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and other Forms of Family Maintenance provides rules for the international recovery of child support and spousal maintenance The second clause creates a delegated power which allows the Government to implement other private international law agreements in domestic law in future via secondary legislation. I confirm that the Government intend to use this power to implement the Lugano Convention 2007, if our application to accede to that convention in our own right is accepted by our international partners, including the EU. This would provide clear, reciprocal rules on cross-border judicial co-operation in civil and commercial matters between the United Kingdom and all the parties to the convention, which include the EU. That would take effect beyond the transition period. However, we also want to use this power to implement other agreements that the United Kingdom may join, both now and in the future. We are already considering joining the Singapore convention of 2019, and the Hague Judgments Convention of 2019 This power is both well defined and, I suggest, narrow. It only allows the Government to implement agreements in the limited field of private international law, which, as the Bill states, covers areas such as jurisdiction, applicable law, and the recognition and enforcement of judgments. For example, we could not use the Bill to implement an agreement designed to do anything other than facilitate the efficient resolution of cross-border disputes. All regulations implementing a new agreement will use the draft affirmative procedure. Furthermore, where the Government are inclined to enter into an international agreement on private international law, then, at the level of international law, that will still require full compliance with the provisions of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010. There will, therefore, be parliamentary scrutiny of the international treaty itself before we seek to draw it down into domestic law by using the affirmative SI procedure In summary, the Bill enables us to remain at the forefront of promoting global co-operation in private international law, and it will be of significant assistance after the transition period for businesses, individuals and families. I beg to move.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-17-lords.u167	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-17	Keen, Richard	New private international law framework	2020-03-17 00:00:00	2020-03-17 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons	I am grateful to the Prime Minister for his reassurance that workers’ rights—avoiding a race to the bottom, no regression, and so on—will be written into the Bill, because it is a huge issue for many Opposition Members and needs to be recognised by many Members on the Government side of the House. Can he give the same reassurance that consumer protection will also be written into the Bill?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-22-commons.u272	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-22	Fitzpatrick, James	Reassurance on consumer protection sought	2019-10-22 00:00:00	2019-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	We all recognise how important early years settings are, both for children and for their parents and carers. Early years settings have been able to open their doors to all children from 1 June. I spoke to sector representative organisations and childcare providers in the first week of wider opening to understand the detailed challenges they face. We know that it is a difficult time for many businesses, and we will continue to ensure that early years providers get the best possible help from all the Government’s support schemes.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u84	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Ford, Victoria Grace	Support for early years settings	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-14-commons	I strongly agree with the point of view so eloquently expressed by my hon. Friend. It is critical that, as well as tackling coronavirus and the economic consequences of the action that we have had to take, we tackle the deep-rooted health inequalities that have exacerbated this disease and its impact on many people. This is a critical part of the levelling-up agenda. Issues such as obesity in particular clearly have an impact on how badly people are affected by coronavirus, and we need to take action in order to ensure that people get more equal life chances across this country.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-14-commons.u237	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-14	Hancock, Matthew John David	Tackle health inequalities	2020-07-14 00:00:00	2020-07-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-lords	My Lords, when the Chief Medical Officer recommended that cannabis medicines be rescheduled, she produced a report showing that the most rigorous regulatory authorities in the world—those in the US, Australia and Ireland, as well as the World Health Organization—had strong evidence of the benefits of cannabis-based medicines for people with epilepsy. In light of that, it is completely unacceptable that only four licences have been granted. Why are UK patients being deprived of these safe and effective medicines which have fewer side-effects than some licensed pharmaceuticals, such as sodium valproate?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-04-lords.u52	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-04	Walmsley, Joan	Grant cannabis medicine licenses	2019-03-04 00:00:00	2019-03-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons	It is a pleasure to respond to this excellent debate, and I commend all hon. Members who have spoken for their thoughtful contributions. In particular, I thank the hon. Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones) for opening the debate I will deal first with the series of questions posed by the hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook). His first question was about the energy White Paper, which we fully expect to be published this year. He will understand that after the new Government took office in July last year, we had the summer recess, followed by the Prorogation debate, debates about the election, then the general election, the Budget and then covid. There were substantial reasons—they are regrettable, I accept—why the White Paper was delayed. We fully expect it to be published this autumn The hon. Gentleman asked about the decarbonisation of heat. I refer him to the fact that we have a heat in buildings strategy, which will outline the policies clearly and simply. There is certainly a great deal of movement in that area The hon. Gentleman said that there are lofty ambitions for day-to-day spending, and suggested that our spending is perhaps more carbon-emitting than it should be. We have actually had great success on the carbon emissions front, particularly in electricity generation. He will know that in 2010, when I entered in the House—he entered in 2015—offshore wind seemed like a fantasy, but in 10 years we have massively ramped up capacity. People say flippantly, “Oh, well, the cost is £39.50 per MWh”—the hon. Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Alan Brown) said that—but that did not just happen by accident. It was a serious attempt by a serious Government to construct an auction—a CfD round—and it managed to drive down costs. It was led by policy and evidence. It has been very successful and is admired throughout the world. That is an example of BEIS delivering substantial change and innovation on carbon emissions reduction and the climate change debate On the open-cast coal mine that the hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich mentioned, that was a difficult question that involved the local community and consideration of the amounts of coal and jobs. He will accept that, as far as the coal ambition is concerned, the initial date for removing coal entirely from the electricity generating network was 2025, but we will deliver it a year in advance. How often is a Government anywhere in the world able to say in a parliamentary assembly such as this, “We are going to do better than our target”? That is another area where he is on very shaky ground.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons.u448	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-07	Kwarteng, Kwasi Alfred Addo	Debate achievements energy delays explained	2020-07-07 00:00:00	2020-07-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-02-lords	My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for so skilfully introducing today’s debate. He has painted a rosy picture, and in many respects, he is entitled to, because there is a good story to be told. As noble Lords have observed, the UK has a record to be proud of, and I am sure we will continue to be a stalwart supporter of NATO. I agree with everything that my noble friend has said—in particular, his assertion that the importance of NATO is increasing. The noble Lord, Lord West of Spithead, touched on the risk of war. He contrasted our naval military situation at the end of the Cold War with our parlous situation now. Being ill prepared for the unexpected—the noble Lord, Lord Patten, referred to dogs that bark in the night—is a sure recipe for being confronted by unexpected conflict. I have said before that at some point, we will get our posterior kicked hard. If the noble Lord, Lord West, cannot succeed in getting the British public to understand that point, I have no chance I have some humble, direct experience of NATO. In the halcyon days of winter 1997-98, when the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, was Secretary of State for Defence, I was serving with Sixth Battalion, REME, on Operation Lodestar with SFOR. I can assure the House that my role was very junior indeed—however, it shows that we in this House have experience at all levels. During that operation from time to time, I would travel down from Šipovo to Split. Noble Lords should not underestimate how much pleasure it gave all of us to see yet another house with its roof back on each time we went along the main supply route. It was the security and stability that NATO provided that made this possible. Not everything in the NATO garden is rosy. In his excellent speech, the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, suggested three or four reasons why NATO has endured. I would suggest another: economics. Each NATO state would have to expend far more on defence than now, only to achieve less in terms of deterrent and security I think we all agree that Trump has a valid point about some members not paying their club fees. The most obvious candidate for criticism in this respect is Germany, and I was grateful for the comments made by my noble friend the Minister on that point. Sadly, it is not Germany’s only disappointing policy; she has carefully surrounded herself with what many term as Article 5 buffer states, then gaily signs up to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project, which will leave other vulnerable countries horribly exposed to interruptions in energy supplies Like my noble friend Lord Patten, I am bound to say that Turkey is also a cause of concern on a number of fronts. I hope that we can succeed in keeping that country on the course of democracy. In this context, I remind the House of the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, regarding the need for a free press. The noble Lord, Lord Bilimoria, mentioned the air defence problems Some noble Lords have touched on Brexit in the context of NATO and I am sure that they are right to do so. However, while the EU will never have anything like the role of NATO, not least because it does not include the United States, it should not be underestimated how much work NATO does by means of its standardisation agreements—STANAGs. There are about 1,300 STANAGs in existence. When I was running an NGO in Rwanda in 1995, we conducted a joint logistic operation with the Canadian component of UNAMIR. One of my team asked me for a relevant telephone number and without looking up, I replied: “Last page of the operation order, look under the heading ‘Command and Signal’”. My team was very surprised at my understanding of the Canadian staff work until I explained that this was a standard NATO orders format—in other words, a STANAG The point is that you can have a military operation under EU political direction and control, but it will nevertheless be run under NATO technical standards and NATO standard operating procedures. There is nothing else, and it would be pointless to develop anything else when we have the NATO procedures. So I cannot see why, post Brexit, we could not contribute to an EU military operation if it was in the UK’s wider interests and if we had a say in developing the policy. I do not see that as much of a change because there never was an absolute obligation on the UK to contribute to any EU operation. It would be very odd if, in the event of a European crisis in which the US did not want to get involved, the EU did not involve or consult the UK. It is also hard to think of a potential EU military operation where the UK would not be able to provide some crucial capability, be it in carrier strike, nuclear submarines, combat air power or strategic airlift—I could go on. Many noble Lords have touched on how we should handle Russia. I agree that we could have handled Russia better during the post-Cold War era, while we ought to understand that the map of the world in the Kremlin is very different to the map that we look at. Nevertheless, I heartily agree with the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Touhig, about the characteristics of President Putin: he is leading his country to ruin by wasting its meagre economic resources on strategic adventures My noble friend the Minister will once again skilfully and convincingly trot out the statistics to show that we are doing very well in terms of defence effort and that a good measure is the percentage of GDP spent on defence. Of course, the weakness there is that it is not adjusted for the lower cost of running defence in a country such as India or China. However, the key point is that the fact that we are doing much better than most of our EU partners does not prove that we are doing anything like enough to meet or deter the threat What should we do? I make no apology for banging on about my next point, which builds on a point made by the noble Lord, Lord Touhig. If we cannot increase our defence capability, we should test and demonstrate that the capability we think we have really works. We can do that by means of medium- or even large-scale overseas deployment exercises. Yes, it would be expensive, but we would get a much greater effect than expenditure on a small increase in capability. In a crisis, our friends, allies and opponents would be in no doubt of our capability. On the other hand, if we have limited and untested capability, we surely have much less international clout and are less valuable to NATO.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-02-lords.u81	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-02	Attlee, John Richard	Support NATO invest more in defense	2019-04-02 00:00:00	2019-04-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons	All I can do here is go back to the Prime Minister’s point of order after the votes last night, where she explicitly said that she was going to take the decisions that had commanded a majority in Parliament back in not only reaching out to people who tabled amendments yesterday, but in her discussions with the EU. I am sure that none of us would want to rule in or out any particular methods of achieving those outcomes that have mandated by Parliament. We need to make sure that those discussions can move forward as freely as possible while still delivering on the outcomes that Parliament has decided.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-30-commons.u8	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-30	Penrose, John David	Respecting Parliament's decisions	2019-01-30 00:00:00	2019-01-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-11-commons	The hon. Member specifically asks about women from the poorest backgrounds, and black, Asian and minority ethnic groups. I thank the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Ms Dorries), for the work she is doing in this regard. Through the long-term plan, the NHS will accelerate action to achieve 50% reductions in stillbirths, maternal mortality, neonatal mortality and serious brain injury by 2025, which specifically affect those women the most.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-11-commons.u39	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-11	Caulfield, Maria Colette	Maternal health disparities focus	2020-03-11 00:00:00	2020-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons	My right hon. Friend said that the documents would be available and on the table tonight. When will they be laid, and can we see them this evening? May I also ask whether the whole set of documents is at treaty level? The documents will be examined extremely carefully by many Members throughout the House and by my European Scrutiny Committee, and we shall need as much notice as possible. Will the Minister tell me at what time the Attorney General’s opinion will be available tomorrow, having regard to the timing of the debate, and whether the Attorney General will come to the House to explain his opinion on the documents before the debate and in good time?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons.u519	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Cash, William Nigel Paul	Document availability clarification request	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons	My right hon. Friend will be aware that nosocomial spread is high in the NHS and that transmission is sometimes via staff. In order to help the amazing teams at Royal Stoke University Hospital and the Hayward walk-in centre, will he give guidance that stops substantive staff working bank, agency and locum shifts in other hospitals, to help reduce transmissions?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-17-commons.u123	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-17	Gullis, Jonathan Edward	Limit staff shift transfers	2020-11-17 00:00:00	2020-11-17 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-lords	My Lords, on The 10-Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution, may I urge my noble friend to press his department to invest some of the £5.2 billion promised over six years for flood and coastal defences in creating new wetlands, which would deliver massive benefits for the environment, nature, communities and, of course, jobs?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-lords.u91	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-14	Randall, Alexander	Invest in wetlands for benefits	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons	My hon. Friend is being generous with his time and is making some excellent points. Something that struck me from the correspondence that I have received from constituents is that they were often advised by accountants to enter into arrangements that would allow them to take home a large proportion of their income, and they were told that that was not illegal, that it was totally above board, and that any tax liabilities would lie with the employer, not the employee. Part of the problem is that we are dealing with people who were acting in good faith and yet feel that they are now being penalised.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-04-commons.u322	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-04	Burghart, Michael Alex	Constituents misled about tax liabilities	2019-04-04 00:00:00	2019-04-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons	I thank the Minister for his principled and precise words. He has recognised that if the institutions are restored, the amendments will fall. If the institutions are restored, however, the issue will not go away. The principle still needs to run through whatever proposals emerge, be they in Belfast for Northern Ireland-based victims or in Great Britain for Great Britain-based victims. Will the Minister commit himself to ensuring that, come what may, the principle he has outlined—that we will support victims but not victim makers—will hold true?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-commons.u229	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-22	Robinson, Gavin James	Support victims not perpetrators	2019-07-22 00:00:00	2019-07-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	DUP	Democratic Unionist Party		M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons	Our focus has been to make sure that people receive their back payments as soon as possible, so we have not looked at the particular conditions for which people were applying to ESA. We do produce ad hoc statistics, so I will certainly take away that request on how we might provide that for the House in future.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons.u208	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Newton, Sarah Louise	Prioritize back payments speed	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-18-lords	My Lords, I support the amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Thornton. As I said in previous debates, we should not be debating these regulations so long after their introduction. Nevertheless, the debates we do have are important. I am convinced that the persistence of the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, in helping the Government shift their position on face masks, albeit grudgingly, has saved lives. One just wishes that face masks, like so many other measures, had been introduced earlier than they were I have recently been travelling by train quite a bit and taking the tube. From my experience, South Western Railway is not doing a bad job. At present, trains are long enough to socially distance and there are regular announcements by guards on the trains. Mask wearing is now the norm on station concourses such as Waterloo, as I asked the Government for in July. One thing I will ask the Minister to take a look at is that you never see sanitising gel dispensers anywhere near ticket machines. It might be advisable to carry your own bottle, but not everyone will Most people comply with mask wearing, at least in the locations so far legislated for, but a minority still do not, even considering exemptions. This week, I counted four separate individuals in one uncrowded tube carriage not wearing masks. Some railway workers and shop workers, who often stack shelves and are therefore out in the open, are not doing so either. It is not mandatory, but it is inconsistent Wearing masks protects others. One wishes that the Government believed in this measure more, but the equivocal stance they take makes room for naysayers, including celebrities. The science is not ambiguous, as the Minister quoted the CMO as saying this week. I ask him to look at the summary by Jeremy Howard and Trisha Greenhalgh of more than 100 studies concluding the effectiveness of masks. In March, the head of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention said that the mistake Europeans were making was not wearing them. This week, the virologist Robert Redfield, director of the United States CDCP, said that face masks might be a more effective tool in limiting the spread of Covid than a vaccine. This begs the question of how masks could be deployed further to tackle the increase in cases we are now seeing. I suggest this could include groups of schoolchildren walking to and from school I also ask the Minster to take a look at a new study from Florida Atlantic University, which concludes that cloth masks are significantly more effective than either visors or masks with valves. Droplets get in under visors. Visors look smart, but too many are using them as an alternative, rather than an additional form of protection, as is mandatory for hairdressers. The Government’s guidance does not say much about visors; it could say more.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-18-lords.u53	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-18	Trench, Nicholas	Support mask regulations	2020-09-18 00:00:00	2020-09-18 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-lords	My Lords, it is a real pleasure to take part in this debate. I am sorry that my noble friend Lord Dubs will not be joining us, but I am speaking before my noble friend Lord Judd—they have both spent many decades of their lives fighting for civil liberties. They will remember, I am sure, Maria Fyfe, who entered Parliament in 1987 and did so much over the years to champion women’s representation, but who sadly died this morning. I am sure that they and others will join me in sending condolences to her family and comrades in Scotland I shall speak specifically to Amendment 22 in the names of my noble friends Lord Hendy and Lord Hain, and moved very able by my noble friend Lady Chakrabarti, but I also support the other amendments in this group which argue that, should this Bill become law, CCAs could be used only to prevent or deter serious crime. The terms “preventing disorder” and being “in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom” are so imprecise that almost any campaigning group or trade union could be included. These criteria are potentially political and could be used simply to defend the status quo against anyone who challenges it It seems quite odd that this legislation could not wait until the findings of the Undercover Police Inquiry. As the inquiry progresses, it is hearing that police have been used to spy on any number of groups that were deemed to be “anti-establishment”, even when they were humanitarian organisations such as Operation Omega, which tried to provide humanitarian aid to then East Pakistan. One police officer sent into the group has said: “They weren’t hurting anyone, they weren’t disturbing anyone. Okay, you could argue that we don’t like to see these things posted on our lampposts, you know, stuff like that. ” He was then asked: “Did you hear them promote or encourage public disorder? ” He replied: “That’s a difficult one to answer, because a lot of organisations recommend demonstrations and activity that would bring their cause to the attention of the press and thereby to the rest of the population. ” A demonstration is of course a legitimate form of campaigning, but it is unfortunately seen as illegitimate in some quarters The undercover work extended into the trade union movement. Trade unions are a legitimate and essential part of our democracy, as guaranteed by the ILO since 1949. Member countries, including the UK, are required to guarantee the existence, autonomy and activities of trade unions, and to refrain from any interference that would restrict this right or impede their lawful exercise. Despite this, the Metropolitan Police Special Branch established the industrial intelligence unit in 1970 to monitor what it saw as growing industrial unrest. There is, we understand, a present day equivalent in the industrial liaison unit of the national domestic extremism and disorder intelligence unit I have no idea what justification could possibly have been used to send spies into humanitarian organisations, political parties or trade unions, but I suspect that preventing disorder and it being in the interest of economic well-being of the United Kingdom will have been used. There can be no justification for this and it should be removed from the Bill On Monday we heard the Statement in the other place that there would be no inquiry at this time into the murder of Pat Finucane—even though there is no doubt that there was state collusion in his assassination. After 30 years, the Government will still not shine a light on this atrocious event. His death should serve as a reminder that Governments and their agents can lose the capacity for moral judgment when they convince themselves that only they serve the greater good We were told on Tuesday that these examples happened a long time ago and that things have changed. But while the Bill continues to cover more than serious crimes and includes subjective actions such as disorder and economic well-being, it is a danger to anyone involved in politics and trade unionism. We should never grant the legal right for covert actions against citizens whose only crime is to disagree with the Government of the day. This amendment would go some way to achieving that.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-lords.u140	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-03	Bryan, Pauline	Opposing covert actions against citizens	2020-12-03 00:00:00	2020-12-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-commons	Has my hon. Friend ever heard so many Opposition Members crying out for an early general election, as they have done for the past two years? The Prime Minister is now giving them that opportunity, and they are running scared. They are not just running scared from the Prime Minister and the next general election, but running scared from the people of this country, who in 2016 said that they wanted to leave the European Union, and it is Opposition Members who are denying them that opportunity to leave the EU. Does my hon. Friend agree that if the British people get the chance to have an early general election, the Conservative party will win it?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-04-commons.u529	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-04	Evans, Nigel Martin	Opposition fears early general election	2019-09-04 00:00:00	2019-09-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-commons	I am afraid to say that I am very disappointed that the Backbench Business Committee has no time allocated for debates next week. We had a tasty morsel or two lined up. We have debate applications that would neatly fit into any time that might become available between now and Christmas, with many keen applicants trying to get slots before Christmas The Leader of the House is right that there was a Minister for Drought under Harold Wilson’s Government. That was the right hon. Denis Howell in 1976, although he subsequently—in a matter of weeks—became the Minister for Floods, which only goes to show that we have to be very careful what we wish for.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-03-commons.u238	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-03	Mearns, James Ian	Disappointed no debate time allocated	2020-12-03 00:00:00	2020-12-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-lords	My Lords, I too welcome the Government’s sadly rather late decision to advise the mandatory wearing of face coverings on public transport from next Monday. The Mayor of London had recommended this two months ago at the height of the pandemic, when drivers were already dying I asked on two occasions in late April when Ministers would consider encouraging the public to wear coverings, only to be told that there was insufficient scientific evidence to do so. Surely the Government must regret taking so long to make this recommendation. No one is suggesting that masks are a cure but, as SAGE said on 20 April: “Wearing facemasks outside the house could complement existing government messaging of social responsibility” They could have helped to provide protection from others who showed no symptoms but were infectious. It is regrettable that the Government have again been too slow to act, disregarding lessons from abroad.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-lords.u159	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-11	Healy, Anna Mary	Late mandatory face coverings decision	2020-06-11 00:00:00	2020-06-11 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-lords	My Lords, I declare my interests as stated in the register and fully support the way that, during the Covid crisis, the Government have tried to allay the fears of those tenants in cases where there is a danger of them being oppressed or evicted by bad landlords or unavoidable economic or social hardship. However, we should reflect that the size of the private rental sector has grown dramatically in recent years. Nearly 25% of the UK population is now housed in the private sector—an increase, over 10 years, of over 60%. In the vast amount of cases, the relationship between landlords and tenants works well and to the satisfaction of both parties. In a small percentage of cases, it does not. This might be because of dissatisfaction felt by one party about the other over some of the arrangements between them or the quality of the agreement between them. However, in only a few cases—proportionally—is the behaviour sufficiently bad to require action by either of them. This may be the anti-social behaviour of a tenant or a long-term failure to pay rent without excuse, or it may be the threatening behaviour of a landlord or a precipitant notice to quit. However, in some cases, the only solution for a landlord may be to commence eviction proceedings The Government recognise that, in the present crisis, some tenants will be under especial pressure—both economic and social—and have therefore introduced changes to give breathing space before evictions can be effected. This is sensible but, surely, we must also consider the effects on many landlords, who are also under enormous pressure and who may well be exemplary in their treatment of their tenants. They also have bills to pay and responsibilities to maintain their properties. If they are without rents or cannot regain possession of properties where bad tenants are currently situated, what are they to do I ask my noble friend to do his best to ensure that there is a level playing field and that, in seeking to help tenants—which I am sure is right—he also looks to ensure that the consequent burden put on landlords is alleviated by more positive and balanced government assistance.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-23-lords.u119	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-23	Kirkhope, Timothy	Balanced support for tenants and landlords	2020-09-23 00:00:00	2020-09-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons	May I answer the last question first? Of course I believe in that sovereign right, but the hon. Gentleman’s memory is a little short. The people of Scotland exercised their sovereign right in 2014, and they decided to remain part of the United Kingdom. SNP Members may not like the decision made by the people of Scotland in their wisdom, but that is the decision that was made, and that is why there is a mandate for this Government in Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland—because they are all part of the United Kingdom. It would be like saying when there is a socialist Government, but there are Conservative MPs in Somerset, that there is no right to rule Somerset. It is not the way a democracy works and I am sorry to say that the point is fundamentally flawed Let me come to an area of greater consensus. I am very well aware of how well the Scottish National party did in terms of representation in the local elections—[Interruption. ] Sorry, I mean in the general election. I therefore recognise the importance of ensuring that Opposition days are fairly given and that the third party is recognised. The balance between it and the Official Opposition has changed, and that right must be borne in mind in the allocation of Opposition days. On the one and a half days, I kept begging the SNP to take up one of those with a no confidence motion, but it was reluctant to do so in the end. So it was not entirely the Government’s fault that the SNP did not get its full allocation On the NHS Funding Bill, I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that I have raised the question of Barnett consequentials, and they apply to the Bill, so it will benefit Scotland. Certification under the EVEL Standing Orders is a matter for you, Mr Speaker, and will come at a later stage. If it were to be so certified, all Members would vote on Second Reading, Report and Third Reading, so opportunities would be available for Opposition Members from all parts of the country to vote on the Bill in its entirety.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons.u132	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-16	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Support UK decision-making process	2020-01-16 00:00:00	2020-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons	I join colleagues—at least those on the Government Benches—in welcoming this groundbreaking Bill. The Opposition’s position on this Bill is illustrative of the fact that even though they may not be prepared to vote for a general election, they are demonstrating, from the contributions they are making to this debate, that despite the wide cross-party consensus in favour of an environmental Bill and the many measures that have been included in it, they cannot bring themselves to congratulate the Government on bringing it forward It is timely that today we are talking about an Environment Bill. It is a day when parts of the Welsh Marches, including much of Shropshire and my constituency, are recovering from a significant water event—something like 50 mm of rain fell in 36 hours on Friday and Saturday leading to widespread flooding, because it landed on saturated ground. The River Severn has barricades up in Shrewsbury and Ironbridge. The Rivers Clun and Teme in my constituency burst their banks. The town of Clun has been cut in two, and some roads around my constituency are impassable. Vehicles have been flooded and are abandoned, and the road network between Cardiff and Manchester has been held up as a result of ballast being washed away. My point is to illustrate how significant it is that we have started to take measures to address the climate emergency. We cannot stop the rain falling, but we can do things about it when it arrives. What I want to spend my few moments talking about are some of the important water measures in this Bill I am a member of the Environmental Audit Committee, and I very much hope to serve on the Bill Committee because I want to press the Government to use the opportunity of this Bill to do more to raise the ecological status of our rivers. It is not acceptable that 84% of our rivers are not meeting current standards. We need to raise those standards and ensure that all our rivers meet them. I will be urging the Government to consider proposals for water companies that I have raised previously in this House with the Secretary of State to see whether there are alternative means to try to use current technologies—novel technologies and, frankly, less intrusive technologies, such as integrated constructed wetlands—as a way to treat and improve the effluent and the consequence of flooding, with run-off foul waters getting into our rivers through such mechanisms I wish to touch briefly on governance. The Government have raised targets in the Bill in a number of areas: water, air, biodiversity, resource efficiency and waste reduction, which are all welcome. There have been complaints that the targets are not tough enough and that it is taking a while to introduce them, but it is a step forward and reflects some of the recommendations made in the pre-legislative scrutiny by the EAC that there will be five-yearly interim milestones for the targets and that they will be annually reported on by both the Government and the Office for Environmental Protection. That provision was sought by our Committee and is therefore welcome I share the desire across the House that we should see measures to prevent the regression of the standards, and I think that is something we should be pressing for in Committee; that may rule out my serving on the Bill Committee, but I make the offer none the less. As far as the Office for Environmental Protection is concerned, it is important to have a pre-appointment hearing to ensure independence, and I endorse the suggestion that it is jointly reviewed by the EAC in addition to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-28-commons.u499	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-28	Dunne, Philip Martin	Welcomes Bill, stresses environmental action	2019-10-28 00:00:00	2019-10-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons	My hon. Friend is correct. We can all remember that, pre-2014, when we held our referendum in Scotland, we were promised that a bonanza of orders would come to the shipyards on the Clyde, and we know exactly what happened to that Let me come back to the Chancellor. Here he is, ready to trot in behind the Prime Minister to deliver a blindfold Brexit that will send our economy into an unmitigated disaster. It is a shameful act of cowardice from the Chancellor, putting his party before people Instead of coming clean with Parliament and with the public, the Prime Minister asks us to vote blindly for this deal today. Despite numerous attempts to ascertain whether the Government have even conducted an economic analysis of the Prime Minister’s deal, they have still not published any analysis. What is the Prime Minister hiding? It is the height of irresponsibility for the Prime Minister to bring her deal to Parliament without providing the analysis of its impact. We know that her deal will cost jobs It is ludicrous for MPs to be asked to vote on a deal while completely blind to its economic consequences. Will the Prime Minister not end the shroud of secrecy and come clean with MPs and the whole of the United Kingdom? Analysis published on the London School of Economics website estimates that “the Brexit deal could reduce UK GDP per capita by between 1.9% and 5.5% in ten years’ time, compared to remaining in the EU. ” The National Institute of Economic and Social Research has warned: “If the Government’s proposed Brexit deal is implemented, then GDP in the longer term will be around 4% lower than it would have been had the UK stayed in the EU. ” That is the reality. Will Members on opposite Benches vote for a deal without knowing the consequences? Will they sleepwalk into disaster? I appeal to Members: do not do this as the consequences are too grave. What is coming down the line after today is unknown, but what is known points to chaos Even in the political declaration, the UK Government confirmed their intention to end free movement of people, which is vital to meet Scotland’s needs for workers in sectors such as health and social care. I met a young trainee vet in Portree in the Isle of Skye a week past Saturday. She is a young woman from Spain who wants to remain in Scotland, but when she qualifies as a vet, she will not meet the earnings threshold that would guarantee her the right to live in Scotland. Prime Minister, that is what leaving the EU is doing. It is denying opportunities to young people who want to make a contribution to our economy. It is shameful to see the hon. Member for Stirling (Stephen Kerr) shaking his head, because we will lose those opportunities to benefit our economy, and we will lose the social benefits that come from that in Scotland.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-12-commons.u394	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-12	Blackford, Ian	Criticizing Brexit deal's economic impact	2019-03-12 00:00:00	2019-03-12 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-24-commons	I congratulate the hon. Member for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Dr Cameron) on securing this debate and welcome the opportunity to set out the Government’s position on smart cities. First, though, I thank the hon. Lady and her colleagues on the British-American parliamentary group delegation for their valuable work in visiting the United States to inquire into smart cities. As Science, Research and Innovation Minister, I have spoken previously about the importance of remaining truly international in our collaborations—we recently published an international research and innovation strategy—and the hon. Lady’s work contributes a great deal to the maintenance of our global partnerships. We must be able to learn from our friends and colleagues across the Atlantic and bring back that learning to the benefit of everybody in the House There is no bigger trend in the world today than the move to urbanisation. By 2050, it is expected that three quarters of the world’s population will live in cities, with nearly 200,000 people globally making that transition every day. It is clear that city living presents unique opportunities and challenges. Smart cities, which involve the melding of digital technology and data to monitor, manage and improve our urban environment are what we need to harness those unique opportunities I reassure the hon. Lady that when it comes to Government policy on smart cities, we provided a formal definition in 2013. It stated that “the concept is not static: there is no absolute definition of a smart city, no end point, but rather a process, or series of steps, by which cities become more ‘liveable’ and resilient and, hence, able to respond quicker to new challenges. ” A smart city can also be defined as “an urban area that uses different types of electronic Internet of things…sensors to collect data and then use these data to manage assets and resources” Although termed a city, a smart city is actually a fluid concept that can incorporate anything that supports it. Those things range from 5G to autonomous vehicles, but it is crucial to note that smart cities are a process as much as a policy Smart cities encompass a vast array of technologies and policies that the Government have a role in creating and influencing, involving everything from transport to energy and communications, as well as the many issues that the hon. Lady raised in her valuable contribution. Because of that, the Government have recognised the need to support the development of smart cities, as part of the industrial strategy, in the interests of economic growth, combating climate change—I was proud earlier to be the Minister responsible for taking forward the statutory instrument that the hon. Lady mentioned—and, crucially, enhancing the quality of life for residents, which must always lie at the heart of any policy. This will be achieved through a number of Government initiatives, to which I shall now turn A smart city, town or area that recognises the need for new and emergent technologies to deliver better living standards for its citizens needs efficient transport, enabled by new technologies. The “Future of Mobility: Urban Strategy”, which the Government published in March, outlines our approach to urban transport innovations, ensuring that technologies are safe, accessible and green. It is worth referring to some of the strategy’s core principles to reassure the hon. Lady that putting the consumer and the citizen at the centre of our vision is exactly what we intend to do. The principles of the strategy include that new modes of transport and new mobility services must be safe and secure by design, and that the benefits of innovation in mobility must be available to all parts of the UK and all segments of society. As I will touch on later, if we are to convince the public of and maintain public trust in the need to invest in future innovation, technology and research, it is crucial that we are able to communicate the value of that for the taxpayer across every region of the United Kingdom Other principles from the strategy include that walking, cycling and active travel must remain the best options for short urban journeys, and that touches on the health-related points that the hon. Lady made in her speech. Mass transit must remain fundamental to an efficient transport system. New mobility services must lead to the transition towards zero emissions. Mobility innovation must help with British congestion through more efficient use of limited road space. The marketplace for mobility must be open to stimulate innovation and give the best for consumers The new mobility services are designed to operate as part of an integrated transport system, combining public, private and multiple modes of transport users. The data—the hon. Lady touched on data—from new mobility services must be shared where appropriate to improve both choice and the operation of that transport system In addition, we have established a future of mobility grand challenge, which I also cover as Science and Innovation Minister. This grand challenge is one of the four announced as part of the industrial strategy. It will take advantage of the extraordinary innovation in UK engineering technology to deliver better journeys for all. The main objectives are to be able to stimulate innovation, create new markets and secure a 21st century transport system. We believe that this could be a £900 billion global market in intelligent mobility by 2025, which is why it is equally important to be in the vanguard of developing those new technologies so that we can be world leaders. Since the “Future of Mobility: Urban Strategy” was published in early 2019, setting out the nine principles that will guide Government decision making, we have continued to ensure that we will take forward the biggest regulatory review of transport in a generation, taking advantage of technological advances to be able to better connect people, goods and services Alongside the strategy and the future of the mobility grand challenge, the Government have launched a competition for up to four new future mobility zones. This £90 million competition will test innovative transport ideas around the UK that could reduce congestion, pollution and costs, while making travel more accessible. Some £20 million of that £90 million was allocated to the west midlands last year to help develop the concept of future mobility zones—zones not just exclusive to cities but including urban areas and towns. As the Member of Parliament for Kingswood, near Bristol, I fully understand the importance of representing the urban region that includes not just the city centre, but areas around the outside of major cities. This can capitalise on related investments in the transport innovation in the region. The remainder of the funding will be awarded through a competitive process, with the winners announced this autumn Internationally, it should be noted that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office hosted a smart sustainable cities workshop in Madrid in February, with a focus on transforming mobility in cities. The workshop brought together 20 cities, looking at planning and delivering new, smart, low-carbon mobility systems Turning to the issue of smart technology, only a few weeks ago, I visited the Bristol and Bath science park to unveil a foundation plaque for the new £70 million Institute for Advanced Automotive Propulsion Systems. This institute is a specialist hub, which aims to deliver transformational research and innovation within the automotive industry, looking at the development of clean, efficient, ultra low emission vehicles. This is just one example of an investment made in a region. We have seen others. I was at Warwick Manufacturing Group in the west midlands on Friday, demonstrating our commitment to invest not just in London, Oxford and Cambridge—that so-called golden triangle of research—but in other areas of the country with traditional technologies that may not have had the opportunity to demonstrate that they can also be in the vanguard I have been to Glasgow, which I know is not far from the hon. Lady’s constituency, to see the fantastic work that is being done on quantum and the impact that quantum can have on the future of smart cities. It is potentially unfathomable at the moment, but we certainly know that those new technologies need to be supported to establish a future opportunity for visions in our cities and allow academic researchers at both Glasgow and Strathclyde to combine with industry to focus on what they know will be the huge potential for quantum. That is just one example of how we are trying to invest additionally not only in existing technologies, but in future and emerging technologies In further efforts to modernise our transport systems, the Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles, a joint Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and Department for Transport policy team, was established in 2015 to secure the UK’s position at the forefront of this technology Automation can save lives, improve traffic flow and offer people better travel options. The Government are committed to ensuring that we can all benefit from the advent of these technologies as they emerge, which is why we intend to invest more than £250 million of industry match funding up to 2022 in research and development and in testing infrastructure. That will accelerate the development of these technologies and, crucially, anchor them in the UK. In addition, the Department for Transport’s £2.4 billion transforming cities fund was launched as part of the industrial strategy and expanded in the 2018 Budget by the Chancellor to address weaknesses in city transport systems. More than £1 billion has been devolved so far to six metro Mayors, and the Government are allocating a further £1.28 billion across another 12 cities on a competitive basis Creating an economy that harnesses artificial intelligence and big data, as the hon. Lady said, is one of the great challenges of our age. Data collected by smart meters, for example, facilitates innovative tariffs, with prices varying throughout the day as a result of a range of energy saving tools for households and small businesses. On Friday, I was in Solihull to see one of 100 homes in an experiment in which we are looking at having sensors placed in every single room As we talk about smart cities, smart towns and smart villages, I would extend the idea further to smart houses, smart dining rooms and smart living rooms so that we are able, for example, to meet the net zero target on carbon emissions by 2050. We know that some of the challenges that we face will be around clean growth. They will also be about looking at existing buildings to see what can done to ensure that they are more energy friendly. That will allow everybody using smart meters to better engage with their energy use and save money on their bills. A better understanding of energy demand will allow new local networks to manage their energy flows by supporting the integration of local decentralised energy resources, reducing the cost of network upgrades, facilitating detailed asset and building-level data, and creating secure, more centralised communication networks. Smart meters are one of the enabling technologies for smart cities. What we have seen already is that by placing technology in individual homes, we are able to connect up with a wider picture. We can take advantage of the data to establish patterns and demonstrate how best we can create future networks Last week, I was fortunate enough to attend a roundtable with the Energy Systems Catapult, which champions a whole-system approach to our network. For that reason, it has been responsible for the Government’s energy data taskforce. It has been challenged to identify gaps in the energy sector where data could be used more efficiently. This approach will be integral to the effective deployment of smart cities in order to encourage industry collaboration. Last week the taskforce published its recommendations, which we, alongside Ofgem, are considering In addition, we established the artificial intelligence sector deal in April 2018, which outlines nearly £1 billion of support for our future AI capability. This includes investment in leadership, skills, data, the new Office for Artificial Intelligence and the Alan Turing Institute, which I was able to visit this morning. Visiting the institute, it was absolutely clear that there is a huge potential for change in our public sector and our local authorities. However, that potential will be realised only if they have the opportunity to harness the high-performance computing and AI modelling that will demonstrate what can be done to define and establish behavioural change within cities Another field that can contribute greatly to the development of smart cities is robotics. At the beginning of the year, I enjoyed a visit to the University of Bristol, where I was promoting a £7 million funding announcement for robots that can be deployed into sewerage, water or gas pipes to inspect them and make repairs. That will be critical for transport systems on every road right down to village roads and country lanes. We know that the disruption caused by taking up pipework can stymie rural communities in particular for months on end, especially if it is the on the only road in and out of the village. It is estimated that innovations such as using robotics to inspect and make repairs without digging up the road in the first place could save the economy about £5.5 billion every year through reduced road excavations. Turning to the need to benefit regions and towns, I could not agree more with the hon. Lady. As I said earlier, it will be vital to demonstrate that this is a shared initiative—that the research that is ongoing around smart cities is not just going to be put in place in the large cities of London, Edinburgh, Bristol, Birmingham or Manchester, but is to be devolved further down to the localities surrounding cities I am also the Minister for agri-tech, so I believe that we can do a lot through advances in rural technology and emerging technologies. The last agri-tech strategy was published in 2013; it is time that it had a refresh, because the technology has moved on. There have been fantastic opportunities to use British research in international partnerships to bring about agricultural change in other countries. We now have the opportunity to use some of that research to benefit rural communities When it comes to investment in areas such as those near the hon. Lady’s constituency, I point to the benefits that have already come about, such as the Innovate UK future cities demonstrator. Innovate UK awarded Glasgow £24 million to become a future cities demonstrator site, developing digital infrastructure and data initiatives to make it an interconnected smart city. What was fantastic about that project was that it led to £144 million in savings and new investments for the council. At the time, it focused on four key areas: active travel, such as cycling and walking; energy; social transport; and public safety. The hon. Lady mentioned small businesses and SMEs. Local businesses reported significant benefits from their involvement with that programme; some 63% of SMEs attracted additional business. When we look at the projects and at the funding from our research councils, it is crucial that we can to make those evaluations and communicate them to the public—to say that they did benefit people’s lives. People may not necessarily have noticed that something was a specific part of a programme established as part of the smart cities initiative, but to further the work we need to do, we need to go out and celebrate those investments Other investments have been made across the country. I wanted to mention to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that the Connected Places Catapult, which spearheaded the digital infrastructure innovation strand, was a key part of the Belfast region city deal, which brought industry, academia and local authorities together around that shared proposal to the Treasury. That resulted in a £350 million investment from the UK Government I went to Belfast back in February and spoke to representatives of the University of Ulster and to the vice-chancellor of Queen’s University, Belfast. They demonstrated to me the importance of the triple helix—investment in a locality by the Government, with the university as a key locator of the knowledge economy in a local area and also with local businesses. It is about supporting local businesses and using the money to put them in contact with academics, who they might not have been in contact with before. I saw that with Quantum in Glasgow and the recent announcement of the ARCHER super-computer in Edinburgh, and with robotics in Bristol—it is about linking them up with Sheffield and Manchester and other regions that will have to adapt and demonstrate the new technology.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-24-commons.u391	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-24	Skidmore, Christopher James	Government strategy on smart cities	2019-06-24 00:00:00	2019-06-24 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-04-commons	(standing on the upper step): No clapping. [Laughter. ] Mr Clarke, thank you for the way you have chaired our proceedings. We have kept you longer than expected and I really appreciate it. You have been steadfast in the job you have done and it really is appreciated May I say thank you to all the candidates? Whoever was selected would have made a great Speaker. We thank those who withdrew—Sir Henry Bellingham and Mr Shailesh Vara—for the way they wanted to ensure that we did not have to stay for another two rounds As I have discussed, it is about the campaign and the challenges ahead for me and this Chamber. I stand by what I have said and stand firm. I hope that this House will be once again a great, respected House, not just in here but around the world. I hope that once again it is the envy of the world. We have to make sure that that tarnish is polished away and that the respect and tolerance that we expect from everyone who works here will be shown, and we will keep that in order. I also want to say something to my family. [Applause] There is one difficult part that I want to get over. There is one person who is not here: my daughter Natalie. I wish she had been here. We all miss her, as a family, and none more so than her mum Miriam. I have to say that she was everything to all of us. She will always be missed but she will always be in our thoughts. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear! ”] I hope to show that the experience I have shown previously will continue. As I have promised, I will be neutral. I will be transparent. I think that this House can do more to ensure that that transparency continues, and nowhere more than in respect of the Commission. I have never served on the Commission—I have never even seen the minutes of the Commission—but I do believe there is a need for a little bit of transparency once again I have to say thank you to my family, but also to the staff from my office who are also with me tonight. They have been with me for a long time. In fact, Bev, who is up there and who will get all embarrassed, has been with me for 21 years. She left university and said, “I’m never going to get married. I’m never going to have children. I don’t want any of that in my life. ” Guess what? She is married, she has children and she is still with me. The same with Peter and Mike. They have done a fantastic job. They have been really good I want to thank everybody. It has been a long night. I do not want to keep you any longer, but I do stand by what I have said. This House will change, but it will change for the better. Thank you, everybody The Speaker-Elect sat down in the Chair and the Mace was placed upon the Table.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-04-commons.u31	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-11-04	Hoyle, Lindsay Harvey	Thanks, promises change, transparency	2019-11-04 00:00:00	2019-11-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-06-lords	Perhaps it would assist the House if one could point out that there has been a general election since the referendum. The Bill is about rejecting no deal, and at the general election in 2017, 53.2% voted for parties that opposed no deal—17.1 million people—and only 14.4 million people, 45.1% of the electorate, voted for the Conservatives, the DUP or UKIP, which would sanction no deal. So the people spoke then, and in the 2019 EU election 44.4% voted for the Brexit or Conservative parties while 54.4% voted for parties that were opposed to no deal, which is what the Bill is about.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-06-lords.u126	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-06	Altmann, Rosalind	Voters opposed no-deal Brexit	2019-09-06 00:00:00	2019-09-06 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons	The hon. Gentleman is suggesting that we set all current arrangements in aspic. Going back some decades, there would have been not 170 offices across the country, but several hundred. No doubt if we went back in time, the hon. Gentleman would have been on his feet telling us that we should keep 700 offices, rather than shrinking the number down to 170. The reality is that the way that the tax authority conducts its affairs is effective—I have given the figures—and there is a model that makes that happen. That lends itself to 21st-century hubs that have the right resourcing to do the job.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-29-commons.u237	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-29	Stride, Melvyn John	Modernize tax authority operations	2019-01-29 00:00:00	2019-01-29 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons	I spent most of my professional career in London working with friends and colleagues from the BAME communities, so it was upsetting for me to find that more than 70% of all NHS and care deaths during the first wave of covid were among the black and minority ethnic communities. Although the reasons for those deaths are not fully understood, there is some anecdotal evidence that the deployment of staff from BAME communities to high-risk or low-protection areas may have played a role in that feature. Will the Minister advise me what action has been taken, in collaboration with the Department for Health and Social Care, regarding potential structural issues in the care services to prevent any repeat of this in the second wave?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-commons.u425	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Hanvey, James Neale	NHS BAME death disparity solutions	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-04-commons	In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Gavin Newlands) the Secretary of State referred to 2017, but in that year his party’s manifesto stated that there would be no cut to free TV licences. On Monday, people in Duke Street were infuriated by that move. There are 6,500 over-75s in my constituency. Will the Minister come and visit and tell them why he is planning to cut their free TV licence?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-04-commons.u40	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-04	Linden, David Melvyn	Free TV licence cuts queried	2019-07-04 00:00:00	2019-07-04 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-commons	May I thank the Prime Minister for the change to the fees, which I think could be very welcome across the House? Does she agree that when we had the cross-party meeting of manufacturing MPs, it was clear that there were a significant number of Labour Members who wanted to see a deal? Does she agree that it is really for the Leader of the Opposition actually to try to represent his colleagues, and he should go to these meetings? It is time to talk across the aisle.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-21-commons.u363	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-21	Heald, Oliver	Encourage cross-party cooperation	2019-01-21 00:00:00	2019-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons	I am grateful to the Minister for advance sight of his statement UK Government decisions on pension costs and funding already result in a shortfall of £48.4 million for the NHS in Scotland, which comes on top of the UK Government making wider budget reductions in health funding for Scotland of £42 million compared with their previously claimed level of consequentials. Scotland now faces a shortfall of £90 million for its health services as a result of UK Government decisions. Now that the UK Government have apparently opened the spending taps, will they pay back the moneys due to Scotland, or will we continue to be short-changed? When will the full Barnett consequentials of this new investment be published In total, the Tories’ decade of austerity has cumulatively cut the Scottish block grant by more than £12 billion in real terms. With the economy already faltering, the Chancellor’s predecessor warned that a destructive no-deal Brexit could inflict a £90 billion hit on the Exchequer and suggested that no new money would be available. How then can the Minister guarantee that this money will come to the NHS?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-30-commons.u132	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-30	Day, Martyn	UK Government shortchanging Scottish NHS	2019-09-30 00:00:00	2019-09-30 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-18-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right in that regard. We are committed to having 100% coverage of Scotland. As he will be aware, a commitment to the Moray growth deal was announced at the Budget. It involves some very exciting projects, including an energy pipeline, employability programmes for service families and a college hub looking at innovation in manufacturing. While the figure has not yet been clarified, the Treasury has provisionally agreed a sum of around £25 million for that growth deal, which I am sure he and other hon. Friends will welcome To get back to the Stirling and Clackmannanshire deal, the UK Government are pleased to be supporting the University of Stirling’s international reputation as a centre of excellence for aquaculture, with an offer of investment in new facilities that will not only safeguard the sector in Scotland and Wales—it can be very significant in supporting rural employment in often remote areas—but allow our world-class researchers to develop technologies that we will be able to export around the world In speaking about developing the infrastructure at Stirling, which will have an international focus, I of course want to take this opportunity to commend to my hon. Friends the excellent facilities at the Centre for Sustainable Aquatic Research at Swansea University. As the UK Government Minister for Wales, it would be remiss of me not to slip that into this speech about the Stirling and Clackmannanshire growth deal We are also supporting the establishment of the international environment centre, which will take full advantage of the natural environment and heritage of the region to bring together academic expertise from across Scotland to explore some of the key challenges of our age The region already represents a major draw for visitors, and local partners have been clear about their desire to do even more in that regard. Of course, any visitor to Scotland will know there is nothing more emblematic than tartan, which is why the UK Government are delighted to provide the investment needed to build the Scottish tartan centre. I am not yet aware of a particular Adams tartan. I hope that there will be one, and if I say that loud enough during the debate, perhaps someone will do a bit of research. However, I would be more than delighted to come up when the Scottish tartan centre is open—if my hon. Friend is brave enough, I will even put the relevant tartan on as well. The centre will provide an historical narrative encapsulating key developments in the history and evolution of tartan, along with related themes that will engage with a diverse audience. I am sure that hundreds of thousands of people will flock to his area to view this fantastic centre We are doing further work to identify additional projects in the Clackmannanshire Council area, and those will be worth around £8 million, as we have heard. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ochil and South Perthshire on everything he has done to help secure that additional money from the Treasury. It is no easy feat wrestling money from the Treasury, so he should be commended My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is planning on announcing more details on that deal shortly. As part of the deal, we are pleased to be releasing some surplus MOD land for development in the centre of Stirling, and the Department for Work and Pensions is running a bespoke scheme in Clackmannanshire to help lone parents return to work Let me quickly refer to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling about the MOD land. At first sight, the land is due to be made available under the defence estates review in 2022, which is well within the 10-year scope of the deal. The office of the Secretary of State for Scotland and the MOD are working together to ensure that the land at Forthside is ready to be released in a fit state On my hon. Friend’s other very valid point, I would just like to politely remind him that the UK Government are committed to Scotland—it is not a case of devolve and walk away. As I have said previously, the UK Government have committed over £1.2 billion to support development in Scotland through the city and growth deal programme. That is what I call real commitment These investments represent a significant package that will help to transform the economies of Stirling, Clackmannanshire and Scotland. Growth deals should be transformational and show the real benefits that can be brought about when Scotland’s two Governments work together instead of pulling apart—[Interruption. ] I agree with the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that we are much better together My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland signed the heads of terms for the deal in May last year and expects to agree the full deal in the summer. That will herald a 15-year programme of investment and growth that will bring real and tangible benefits to all those who live and work across the region. My hon. Friend the Member for Stirling is right. He wants to see hi-vis jackets and spades in the ground: I am happy to go up there with a spade and break the ground myself if necessary. In my view, the deal will be the engine that drives the whole of Scotland forward Question put and agreed to.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-18-commons.u448	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-18	Adams, Nigel	Scotland growth deal commitments outlined	2019-02-18 00:00:00	2019-02-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons	I note the right hon. Gentleman’s approach, and I am interested in the fact that he is perhaps now interested in delivering Brexit, even though everything he has said thus far suggests that his party is trying to stop it. I take on board what he has said. This is why we have made funding available to ports such as Portsmouth, and discussions have taken place between Portsmouth and the Department for Transport. He also raised the broader issue of support for local authorities, and this is why we remain in close contact with local government and why we still have £10 million available for any immediate pressures that may emerge in the forthcoming year.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-08-commons.u4	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-08	Brokenshire, James Peter	Brexit funding support for ports	2019-04-08 00:00:00	2019-04-08 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. People do think that UNICEF will be funding people in Yemen, and that is where it boasts of spending money and helping people who are in dire need, and that is quite right. That is a worthy service, and it is where it has support from British Government. Domestically, the British Government’s record is absolutely first class. We are working incredibly hard. We have expanded free school meals to all five to seven-year-olds, benefiting 1.4 million children. We have doubled free childcare for eligible working parents, and we will establish a £1 billion childcare fund, giving parents the support and freedom to look after their children. We are spending £400 million of taxpayers’ money to support children, families and the most vulnerable over winter and through 2021, and we are putting an additional £1.7 billion into universal credit work allowances by 2023-24, which will give families an extra £630 a year. In addition, over 630,000 fewer children are living in workless households than did in 2010—the best route out of poverty—with 100,000 fewer children in absolute poverty between 2010 and 2019. That is a very strong record. UNICEF does admirable work outside the United Kingdom.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-30-commons.u427	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-30	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Government support for families detailed	2020-12-30 00:00:00	2020-12-30 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons	I, too, wish to speak in support of new clause 2; we would be content this afternoon with a commitment from the Minister that he will explore this proposal with the Chancellor in the spending review, which we know is forthcoming I shall give some numbers, because I think they will help this debate. The total cost of the Commonwealth games is about £778 million, about three quarters of which is being provided by Her Majesty’s Government. Some £184 million is coming from Birmingham City Council and its partners, with £25 million going towards the Alexander stadium from the combined authority, plus a further £165 million going to kick-start the housing development, including the athletes’ village, from the combined authority I say that because the Minister will be aware of two significant risks to the local contribution, which makes up about a quarter of the budget. First, there is a risk to the local government contribution. At the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet said to local authorities up and down the land, “Do whatever it takes to get through this crisis, keep the receipts and we will pay you back on the other side. ” The House will be amazed to learn that the deal is now beginning to unravel and the Minister’s Cabinet colleague in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is beginning to query whether all the bills will be paid. In a city such as Birmingham, that means we could be confronting a deficit of £164 million this year. That is why the Minister has an obligation to take steps now to de-risk the local contribution to the games It is not just Birmingham City Council that is in jeopardy; the combined authority is, too. We revealed just a week or two before the elections were postponed that the Mayor’s budget has a £1.2 billion black hole in it. He has made commitments £1.2 billion in excess of the funds he has available. That is because he failed to get his precept through, he failed to get any movement on supplementary business rates and the funding that was going to novate from the local enterprise partnerships to the combined authority has not come through. In addition, there is a £700 million funding gap on the transport plan, because the Department for Transport is beginning to query some of the transport schemes. The broad point I want to make is that coronavirus has created a significant risk to the local authority contribution, and it would appear that there is a significant risk in respect of the combined authority as well.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-11-commons.u360	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-11	Byrne, Liam Dominic	Support for new clause 2	2020-06-11 00:00:00	2020-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Huw Merriman), and I agree with the points that he made This is the first time I have contributed to any of these debates—I have managed to avoid doing so until now—but I have worked with right hon. and hon. Members across this House. Incidentally, I pay particular tribute to the right hon. Members for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin), for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) and for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) and the hon. Member for Grantham and Stamford (Nick Boles). It has been a pleasure to work with people who have been united in a desire to find a way forward, and united also in recognising that there is an absolute need to avoid leaving the EU with no deal I believe it is essential now that we seek to build consensus, and I feel that for two reasons. First, we are in a perilous state: there is a real danger to this country. There is a high risk that, unintentionally, we could end up in just a few days’ time crashing out of the EU with no deal. The damage to the economy would be profound. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey), with the right hon. Member for Meriden (Dame Caroline Spelman), has made very well the points about the absolute importance of protecting manufacturing industry, and the auto industry in particular. As Chair of the Science and Technology Committee, I should also say that the damage to our science community from crashing out with no deal would be profound, and it seems to me that we have to avoid that at all costs The second reason why I think it is important to build consensus is that we live now in a horribly divided country, with entrenched positions and intransigence on both sides. This is deeply damaging to our country, and we risk damaging the social contract. I think we play with fire if we do not recognise the danger, and I do not think enough people have been seeking to find ways of bringing this country together again, rather than maintaining the divisions I approach this as someone who campaigned for and voted for remain. It may be odd to say this, but I respect the alternative point of view. I have my own criticisms of the EU, and I always have done. It is massively over-centralised, and I think it needs substantial reform—it needs to be more dynamic and more flexible—yet I was clear in my mind that I should support and campaign for remain. However, I lost, and we now need to find a way forward out of this mess. No route is perfect and no route is risk-free; danger is everywhere It is vital that Parliament today actually supports a way forward, rather than rejecting everything yet again. Another day of everything being defeated risks inflicting further enormous damage on this institution and of leaving the country feeling that it is without leadership. The country is crying out for leadership. I want this Parliament to agree on a Brexit deal that, as far as possible, protects jobs, the economy and the funding of public services, and maintains the closest possible relationship with the European Union—and then I want that settlement to be put to the people of this country in a confirmatory referendum The Prime Minister opposes the single market and a customs union, and her red lines have stayed rigidly in place all the way through. She says she cannot support those because they were not in the manifesto, but in 2017 she failed to get a majority. Just as in the coalition the parties coming together had to make compromises—a party cannot get everything in its manifesto if it does not have a majority in Parliament—this necessitates compromise. The Government Chief Whip was absolutely right to say that the election changed everything, yet the Prime Minister has failed to recognise that. She has failed to reach out and has stuck rigidly to red lines that are inappropriate in a balanced Parliament I will vote to support a customs union, the argument for which was put very succinctly and effectively by the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke). Manufacturing industry in our country demands that we remain part of the customs union, and that is why I will support it. It is not sufficient on its own, but it is a building block. I will also support common market 2.0. It is not perfect, but it seeks to ensure the closest possible economic relationship, protecting the economy and jobs I would say to the people who support a confirmatory referendum that motion (E) says that nothing in this House should be approved without a confirmatory referendum, but we have to agree what this House decides. They should please engage in that process, come together and support a deal that protects jobs and the economy—and then put it to the British people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-01-commons.u395	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-01	Lamb, Norman Peter	Support Brexit deal, avoid no-deal	2019-04-01 00:00:00	2019-04-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons	Can the Leader of the House confirm today that if the Bill is successfully amended at various stages—perhaps involving a customs union provision or passing the deal subject to a public confirmatory referendum—the Government will respect those decisions by Members of this House and that we will see the Bill through to its conclusion, as amended?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-21-commons.u380	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-21	Sweeney, Paul John	Respect amended Bill decisions	2019-10-21 00:00:00	2019-10-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-lords	My Lords, when the Government put England into a new lockdown, it was announced that the furlough scheme would be extended for England. When the Prime Minister was challenged whether this would likewise be the case for Scotland, he said of course it would, so why did the UK Government refuse the Welsh Government’s original request that furlough be available for businesses in Wales at those times when Wales is in lockdown, thereby ignoring the pressing needs of business in Wales and causing unnecessary uncertainty?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-lords.u100	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-04	Wigley, Dafydd Wynne	Furlough discrepancies between UK nations	2020-11-04 00:00:00	2020-11-04 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	PC	Plaid Cymru	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords	My Lords, does the Minister accept that the £2 billion put into the not very affordable housing programme falls woefully short of the £14.6 billion per year of capital grant recommended last week by the National Housing Federation and others? Without it, we will continue to see the nearly 40-year legacy of chronic failure to build social, not affordable, housing—a policy that has now driven our most vulnerable into the arms of the most unscrupulous parts of the private sector.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-02-lords.u5	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-02	Grender, Rosalind	Housing funding insufficient	2019-07-02 00:00:00	2019-07-02 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-04-commons	I must push back on some of what the hon. Lady said. It is wrong to conflate all black people with recent immigrants and assume, which is what she just said, that we all have to pay a surcharge. That is wrong. I am a black woman who is out to work. My employer—[Interruption. ] This House has done everything it can to make sure that I am following the guidelines and that all of us are. It is absolutely wrong to try to conflate lots of different issues and merge them into one, just so that it can get traction in the press. I go back—[Interruption. ] I go back to what I said in my original statement. It is not right for us to use confected outrage. We need courage to say the right things, and we need to be courageous in order to calm down racial tensions, not inflame them just so that we have something to put on social media.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-04-commons.u152	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-04	Badenoch, Olukemi Olufunto	Misrepresenting black immigrants issue	2020-06-04 00:00:00	2020-06-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-lords	Perhaps I may press the Minister on one point. It is easy to see that there is a distinction between an online procedure and the way the court works. If it was made clear that the online procedure is largely geared to ensuring that the systems that lie behind it operate efficiently across the system but that, in using that procedure, if people did not want to go online the court would undertake to scan the documents in—if that distinction was made—would the Minister accept that what really is needed, because these amendments do not grapple with the problem, is a guarantee to the litigant that he can go to court, hand in a piece of paper and it will be scanned into the system? That is all If that is the effect of these amendments—and it is limited to that—would that not achieve everything and give an opportunity to increase access to justice? In the current system access to justice is a figment of the imagination, but the use of an online procedure would enable this to happen. Will the Minister look at this issue again in the light of my suggestion to him?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-lords.u80	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-10	Thomas, Roger	Guarantee paper-to-digital court access	2019-06-10 00:00:00	2019-06-10 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-commons	My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The people, many of whom voted remain, will just not understand why we should even think of a second referendum when we have not implemented the result of the first As I was saying, whatever happens after tonight, the UK must leave the EU at the end of March to implement and honour the will of the British people. I trust our Prime Minister on this. I have heard her say over and over again that we will not revoke article 50. I have heard her say over and over again that we will be leaving on 29 March. Yes, that may mean some difficulties, but those difficulties are nothing compared with what this country has had to go through in the past. We are a strong, proud and determined country, with a people who believe and have confidence in our country, so let us go forward to 29 March, leave the European Union and have that bright future that we know is ahead of us.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-15-commons.u345	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-15	Hoey, Kate	Support for Brexit by March	2019-01-15 00:00:00	2019-01-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons	Deforestation in the Amazon is indeed a catastrophe of global and generational proportions. We must of course do the right things about it and I very much welcome the pressure that the Minister has described, but is he not also aware of the fact that the deforestation of the Amazon has decreased quite considerably over the last 20 years, and that while it was very, very bad, it is very much less bad than it was; and equally that the level of decrease, therefore, in the size of the forest has been reduced? Does the Minister therefore agree that this is a domestic matter for the Brazilian Government, and that we must persuade them to do the right thing, rather than confronting or berating them?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-commons.u43	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Gray, James Whiteside	Amazon deforestation decreased; persuade Brazil	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons	Scotland is approximately two thirds the size of England, but we have more challenging topography and islands to serve, yet Scotland will get a fifth of England’s Building Digital UK fund, and for the R100 programme, the UK Government are only committing £20 million towards the £600 million programme. Does the Minister agree with the recommendation of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee that future allocations to Scotland should be based on need, taking into account all those factors?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-13-commons.u16	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-13	Brown, Alan	Scotland needs more digital funding	2020-02-13 00:00:00	2020-02-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-commons	I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for putting on the record my knowledge of mid-Wales and support for so much of what is taking place there. I would be delighted to join him and visit the two institutions in his constituency and in that of his neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire (Craig Williams), when we are allowed to do visits in future.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-commons.u159	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-07	Opperman, Guy Thomas	Support for mid-Wales institutions	2020-10-07 00:00:00	2020-10-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-25-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for that question. The Committee on Climate Change assessed 33 sectors, and we welcome its report. We are committed to taking robust action to improve resilience to climate change. We will formally respond to the Committee’s detailed recommendations in October, in line with the timetable set out in the Climate Change Act 2008, and that will include the way climate change affects communities.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-25-commons.u4	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-25	Goodwill, Robert	Commitment to climate resilience	2019-07-25 00:00:00	2019-07-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons	I support today’s Gracious Speech. I have spoken on the first day of every Gracious Speech debate since I was first elected to Parliament, but never under these circumstances. The atmosphere is a little strange. We are all a little subdued, perhaps because colleagues are stressed out for various reasons, although that is not to say that the quality of the speeches from my hon. Friend the Member for North East Derbyshire (Lee Rowley), who is no longer in his place, and my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Sarah Newton) was not absolutely splendid This really is a broken Parliament, but I have some good news. I, a Scottish National party Member, the hon. Member for Glasgow North (Patrick Grady), who happens to be in the Chamber, and some Labour and Conservative colleagues were all in Rome yesterday for the beatification—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-14-commons.u148	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-14	Amess, David Anthony Andrew	Support for Gracious Speech	2019-10-14 00:00:00	2019-10-14 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-commons	I can certainly confirm that buildings that are without cladding should not have an EWS1 form apply to them. EWS1 forms can be applied in other egregious circumstances, and we are working with the sector to make sure that we obviate, as far as is possible, the responsibility of leaseholders to provide those forms. There is more work to be done to ensure that buildings can have their value restored to them and that people can move effectively without recourse to an EWS1 form.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-24-commons.u190	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-24	Pincher, Christopher John	EWS1 non-cladding buildings unnecessary	2020-11-24 00:00:00	2020-11-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons	May I just say ever so gently and candidly to the right hon. Gentleman that he is not presiding over the strengthening of the Union—he is presiding over its demise? Support for independence is now at an all-time high at 55%—but after today it is going to get a lot, lot worse for him. If there was ever any doubt that this Government were determined to override the authority of the Scottish Parliament, it is clause 46 of this disgraceful Bill today. Why does he not man up? Why does he not confess and be honest with the Scottish people and tell them that this is an unadulterated power grab?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-09-commons.u26	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-09	Wishart, Peter	Union demise power grab	2020-09-09 00:00:00	2020-09-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons	Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. As there is just so much distrust of the Prime Minister and the signing of this letter, may I suggest, through your good offices, that this is done as publicly as possible? Now, the popular TV programme “Strictly Come Dancing” is on tonight, and I am pretty certain that Tess and Claudia would welcome the Prime Minister to the show and order that that letter be signed so that the whole nation could observe it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-19-commons.u472	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-19	Wishart, Peter	Public signing of Prime Minister's letter	2019-10-19 00:00:00	2019-10-19 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons	I was just discussing the process of improving the Government response through feedback, often from colleagues, so I am very grateful to the hon. Lady for giving her feedback on those specific areas. In so doing, she will have activated Government processes with the relevant Departments, which will then look at the issues that she has mentioned.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-25-commons.u244	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-25	Norman, Alexander Jesse	Improving Government response via feedback	2020-03-25 00:00:00	2020-03-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons	The Minister talks about giving a safety net to the people of Northern Ireland. Does he recognise that the majority of people in Northern Ireland regard the Bill as taking away their safety net by undermining the Good Friday agreement? That is the view in Northern Ireland, and it is important that the Government listen to it, not act contrary to it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons.u264	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-29	Farry, Stephen Anthony	Undermining Good Friday Agreement concerns	2020-09-29 00:00:00	2020-09-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	A	Alliance	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-lords	My Lords, the noble Lord perhaps anticipates what I shall come to in the course of my reply—how prescient he is in that regard The body is not under a sentence of death and the rationale for the ability to transfer was hinted at by the noble Lord when he talked about bodies that had long outlived their usefulness. I will elaborate on this point in a moment, but I certainly do not consider that the provisions of paragraph 39 impinge on the effective independence of the IMA. I would add—I will elaborate upon this—that we must have regard not only to the intentions of the Executive but to the joint committee and, therefore, to the interests of the other party to the international agreement that has given birth to the IMA Let me continue with the point I was about to raise on some of the further amendments spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Greaves. First, on Amendments 52 and 53, which seek to remove certain standard provisions for remuneration in respect of public bodies, he alluded to the term “gratuity”. There are circumstances in which public servants are brought into a body but, for one reason or another, their position is terminated early or prematurely and consideration has to be given to the question of gratuities. Where public servants are already employed in a position where they can be remunerated and there is a provision for gratuities to attract suitable employees into bodies such as the IMA, one must generally have regard to equivalence of terms and conditions. Therefore, because that appears in the context of other public bodies, it is repeated in the context of this legislation Amendment 54 would remove provisions that provide a proportionate and sensible way of approaching potential conflicts of interest for IMA members. At all times those members will be expected to adhere to the Cabinet Office Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies, and the approach set out in this paragraph in its unamended form is consistent with the code. For example, an individual member may make a subjective decision that they should disclose a conflict of interest but the board may determine objectively that it is not a pertinent conflict of interest and that they can therefore continue. That is why the matter is expressed in those terms The Government also expect the IMA to follow best practice in relation to its own transparency. Therefore, we regard Amendments 55 and 56 as unnecessary. Indeed, amending the Bill in the way proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, would take decisions around its transparency away from the IMA and thus, essentially, undermine its status as an independent body. We regard the IMA as essentially an independent body but, while enjoying the status of an independent body, it must be able to discharge certain functions as it sees appropriate, albeit while having regard to the relevant codes There is also a reference to not charging for the body’s functions in Amendment 61. That is unnecessary because this body will not charge for its functions. They are essentially systemic—as the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, appreciated, it is not a case of individual applications and individual disposals—and there is no room for any form of charging. Again, we feel it is unnecessary to consider that amendment On the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, important though the IMA will be in providing additional assurances that citizens’ rights will be protected, we do not expect its functions to be required in perpetuity. Indeed, the withdrawal agreement recognises that reality. Years from now, it might be more appropriate and effective to protect these rights differently. It is for this reason that we have included two powers in Schedule 2: one to transfer the IMA’s functions to another body under paragraph 39 and the other to remove or abolish the IMA’s functions under paragraph 40, but only following a decision by the relevant joint committees to do so As noble Lords have appreciated, the first power is about future-proofing to make sure that citizens’ rights obligations are monitored as effectively and efficiently as possible in the future. Indeed, years from now, the type of oversight needed for the UK’s citizens’ rights obligations and the wider UK regulatory landscape may have changed materially from what it is today, and in such new circumstances it may be more appropriate and effective for another public body to perform the IMA’s role. Removing that power, as would be required by Amendment 58, spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, would make us less capable of ensuring that we are in a position to provide an efficient and effective monitoring of citizens’ rights and obligations In any event, we would be sure to keep the EU and the EEA EFTA states appropriately informed of any decision to transfer the IMA’s functions. Again, that would be by way of the joint committee and would not involve some unilateral executive action by the UK Government. Indeed, if this power were ever used, we have ensured that it would not affect the independence and effectiveness of how citizens’ rights obligations are monitored. The Secretary of State must have regard to the need for the transferee to possess the necessary independence and resources to provide effective oversight of citizens’ rights obligations Let me reassure the House that the commitments we have made to the devolved Administrations about their role in the Independent Monitoring Authority will be upheld in the event that its functions are transferred to another public body. We have designed this power so that the Secretary of State can make any modifications that he considers appropriate to the constitutional arrangements of the transferee. This will ensure that an equivalent to the important role of the devolved Administrations in the IMA is replicated for the transferee. I hope that reassures the noble and learned Lord, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd—I apologise if I have mispronounced the Welsh—and other noble Lords that, in these circumstances, Amendment 59 is unnecessary As I indicated, we have included a second power to abolish the IMA, which can be exercised only following a decision by mutual consent through the relevant joint committees, comprising representatives of the UK on the one hand and the EU and EFTA states on the other. This power can do no more than give effect to a decision at the international level. It cannot be exercised following a unilateral decision by the Secretary of State or the Executive. We would give extremely serious consideration to any decision to agree to abolish the IMA and I am confident that the EU and EFTA states would do likewise.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-lords.u194	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-14	Keen, Richard	Defending IMA provisions and future-proofing	2020-01-14 00:00:00	2020-01-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons	The right hon. Lady is absolutely right that we want a broad-based dialogue, and that the whole House condemned the original attack that took place on 14 February. I have to say that the concern about China’s veto is unfortunately not isolated to issues around Kashmir. There are other areas, not least in relation to the Rohingya population from Burma, on which, as she knows, the prospect of a veto and of a lack of co-operation does not make life easy within the UN Security Council. There are other organisations, such as the European Union and the UN Human Rights Council, through which we will try to utilise as much muscle as we can, again in collaboration in with other countries, to try to bring about the peaceable progress to which she refers The right hon. Lady also raised the humanitarian situation. We recognise that there are and have been long-standing human rights concerns in both Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir. We believe that any allegation of human rights abuses is of great concern and has to be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently. I reassure the House, as I did the Members here who were at the meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on 23 January, that we will continue to raise issues relating to Kashmir, including human rights, at all opportunities with the Governments of both India and Pakistan I reiterate the right hon. Lady’s words. It is important for us, given the importance of the diaspora that we have here, to make it clear, as she rightly says, that the worst of all worlds would be many more decades of deprivation and humanitarian problems in Kashmir. To intervene or interfere, or to try to mediate in a broader way, is not necessarily the role for the United Kingdom. Our role, not least because of that diaspora, is to at least try to present that there must be a better future for future generations of Kashmiris than the last 70 years. We need to focus more attention on the future, rather than past. I very much hope that one way in which our diaspora here can make a contribution is to try to help to build up industry, to provide some prosperity for future generations of Kashmiris.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-commons.u168	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Field, Mark Christopher	Kashmir conflict dialogue and mediation	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons	The first weeks in school are really important for helping four-year-old children settle in and form positive relationships. University College London’s study of the Government’s pilot of the reception baseline assessment last year found that the test caused anxiety, stress and a sense of failure in many children—and we are talking about four-year-olds here. Will the Government do the right thing and abandon their plans to bring in reception baseline assessments?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-22-commons.u34	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-22	Greenwood, Margaret	Oppose reception baseline assessments	2020-06-22 00:00:00	2020-06-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons	We recognise that at present there are limited circumstances in which Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs can disclose information, such as when consent has been given by a taxpayer or when compelled to do so to comply with a court order. The Bill clearly continues that tight framing over the protection of information I have a few questions for the Minister, but I shall first comment on amendment 1. Although it is clear that amendment 1 aims to make watertight clause 2(8)—and I do understand the concerns behind that—Labour is satisfied that subsection (8) offers sufficient protection. However, I hope that the Minister can expand on that and explain what kind of instances subsection (7) might cover so that we can be fully assured on that point. As we said earlier, this Bill is very much a lift of clauses 8 to 10 of the Trade Bill, although it diverges slightly by widening the protections in clause 2(8), ensuring that no disclosures made under this Act would “contravene the data protection legislation, or…be prohibited by the investigatory powers legislation”, rather than including specific references to the parts of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 and the Data Protection Act 2018, as we saw previously. Will the Minister give us a reason for that change and let the House know what is now in scope that was not previously The Bill gives new powers to HMRC to share information with international bodies, local bodies, devolved Administrations and others for analysis and monitoring. Will the Minister elaborate on the purposes for which that might be done, more specifically? Perhaps he could also explain the way in which the border operations centre will use that data to support local authorities, local resilience forums and other key public services, such as hospitals and clinical commissioning groups, when transporting key medicines or vaccines during the pandemic A little more broadly, I wonder whether the Minister could give other details about the border operations centre and the Government’s preparations for the end of the transition period. For instance, after the awarding of the port infrastructure fund yesterday, what assessment has he made of the number of ports that consider their allocation of the fund adequate to cover the necessary infrastructure changes required by the border operating model? As that fund was so significantly over-subscribed, what discussions is the Minister having with the Cabinet Office to ensure that our borders are fully operational by 1 January There is another point on which many of my colleagues and I have pressed Ministers. I do not think that we have had the opportunity to press this Minister on it, though, so I will give him a chance to answer. Can he tell us how many customs agents of the 50,000 recommended by the Government have now been trained and recruited? Will he also give us an update on the IT systems required to process customs and support our borders after the transition? Data sharing under the powers of the Bill is clearly welcome, but we also need the systems that sit alongside it to enable us to minimise disruption The Bill is needed to allow public bodies to access information about their areas and to prevent disruption. It also contains useful protections regarding data sharing, but it is a drop in the ocean when it comes to preparedness for the end of the transition period, so I hope that the Minister can answer some of those additional questions and give not simply this House, but business, the reassurance that it needs.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-16-commons.u294	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-16	Blomfield, Paul Christopher	Data sharing and transition preparedness	2020-12-16 00:00:00	2020-12-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons	The purpose of moving civil service jobs out of London is not simply to relocate jobs from one part of the country to another, but to place policy makers in communities that have been left behind for too long, such as mine in Redcar and Cleveland. Can my hon. Friend confirm that she has seen the plans presented by Ben Houchen to relocate civil service jobs to Teesside, and will she commit to meeting me and my Tees Valley colleagues to progress these plans further?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons.u63	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-12	Young, Jacob	Request to relocate civil service jobs	2020-11-12 00:00:00	2020-11-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-commons	Permanent exclusion should only ever be used as a last resort and must be lawful, reasonable and fair, and that is why we have already asked all schools to be understanding of the needs of all children and young people, including those with SEND, especially as they return. That is exactly the point I covered in my open letter last week to all children with SEND and their families. Off-rolling is never acceptable and will be monitored by Ofsted.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-07-commons.u87	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-07	Ford, Victoria Grace	Fair exclusion policies only	2020-09-07 00:00:00	2020-09-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons	I thank the Minister very much for that reply. She may have seen the “Exposure” programme broadcast last week, which captured the abuse and threats of death that I have faced, that my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Antoinette Sandbach) has faced, and that my former right hon. Friend—still a friend—the right hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry), has faced. There was also an excellent response from the Speaker to a point of order that I raised on the matter. Does the Minister agree that the systematic intimidation of MPs in this place on the way they vote should be a real concern to anybody interested in our democracy?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-13-commons.u59	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-13	Morgan, Nicky	Intimidation of MPs concerns democracy	2019-03-13 00:00:00	2019-03-13 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-30-lords	In answer to the noble Baroness’s second question, the short answer is yes. This is demand led. For example, initially we had flights from Delhi, Mumbai and Goa. We commenced the programme in those cities for logistical reasons—to ensure that permissions were received for charter flights. A large proportion of British travellers are still seeking to return from Ahmedabad in Gujarat, India, and from Amritsar in the Punjab, and we will continue to operate flights. The portals were closed to ensure that we could clear the wait-list, which is still operational. I assure the noble Baroness that an email link to the high commission is now being offered to those who still wish to register but who did not meet the original deadline date for registering themselves on the database for returns. We have made a commitment to return those who wish to come back to the UK, and we will continue to meet that demand in India The noble Baroness, rightly, referenced Pakistan and Pakistan International Airlines. We have talked regularly to the chairman of PIA. She will know that I was directly involved in the case that she referred to. I have also been involved in discussions with the Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi authorities and at a local level— I have been ringing Chief Ministers to ensure that we get local permissions. Perhaps I may just put this in context. For every passenger who is returned from India, for example, the level of detail that we have to go into, because of the curfews that have been imposed, is such that we have to provide every local authority with details of every vehicle that is used to ensure that we can get British travellers to the airport on time to catch their flight. Our diplomats are not expert travel agents, but I can tell noble Lords that they have learned a great deal from the repatriation efforts. I am sure that all noble Lords will join me in commending them for their excellence—notwithstanding the challenges, which we are seeking to address—in what they have done and continue to deliver.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-30-lords.u215	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-30	Ahmad, Tariq	Repatriation efforts in India/Pakistan	2020-04-30 00:00:00	2020-04-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons	Unpaid family carers need family-friendly working arrangements so that they can balance their work and caring responsibilities; they need an NHS that recognises that their own physical and mental health could suffer too, and they need to know that we are there to support them. Rather than criticising families and saying that they should be doing more, we should acknowledge that many carers have not had a break for weeks, months or even years. We have to change that, because this is not going to happen to somebody else. This is going to happen to every single one of us here Thirdly, we need better care jobs. Paid careworkers do some of the most important work in the country, looking after the people whom we love, but many struggle on low pay and zero-hours contracts, with high levels of stress and little training. No wonder staff turnover and vacancy rates are so high, although the vast majority of careworkers say they love the work that they do. We need a comprehensive strategy to improve the pay, professional development and employment security of care staff, and we desperately need to increase the number of careworkers too. We shall need more than half a million more careworkers in a decade’s time, not to improve the care system by providing better quality or wider access, but just to meet increasing demand That is why the points-based immigration system announced by the Government will be a disaster. If we already need more than half a million extra careworkers just to meet levels of demand, how on earth will we cope with that new system? It will not be possible. I beg the Minister to meet me, and others, to discuss the development of a separate route into social care in the migration system of the future, because otherwise we simply will not cope None of those changes—improving access to care, more support for families and better care jobs—can be delivered on the cheap, but the truth is that families, the NHS and our economy as a whole cannot afford for us not take action. We need, first, an immediate and significant injection of cash into the system in next month’s Budget, and, secondly, a long-term plan for investment and reform. Any new funding system must work for disabled adults as well as older people. It must strike the right balance between individuals and the state. I, for one, strongly believe that we should pool our resources and share our risks rather than leaving people to cope alone. The system must also be fair across the generations. I do not believe that the working-age population should pay for all the additional costs of caring for our ageing population Wealthier older people will need to make a contribution too Alongside this funding reform must be a change in the way in which social care is provided, so that it is not just about time slots and tasks simply to keep people alive, but about offering great support how, where and when people want it, so that they can lead the lives that they and their families choose This radical reform of social care is just one of the changes that we must make to meet the needs of our ageing population, which is one of the biggest challenges that we face as a country. We need to change our housing so that it helps people to live independently at home for longer. We need to reform the world of work so that, as we live for longer, we can work for longer and more flexibly. We need to change our health services so that they keep people fitter and healthier for longer as we live for longer. None of those things will be easy, but if we want to meet the challenge of our ageing population and if we want to make Britain the best country in the world in which to grow old, we need to grasp this nettle, and we need to do it now.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-25-commons.u284	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-25	Kendall, Elizabeth Louise	Support carers and reform care	2020-02-25 00:00:00	2020-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons	As we have made very clear, we want to ensure that there is no hard border in Northern Ireland. That is a priority for the Government, and we have reached a new agreement with the EU that delivers on it. Of course, we need to work through the details of precisely how that arrangement will work The hon. Gentleman needs to recognise that the world is moving on: we are moving into an area in which trade is being digitised, and we are finding new ways of facilitating customs. Rather than being negative and a naysayer, why does he not contribute to the solution?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-commons.u60	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-23	Truss, Elizabeth Mary	No hard border in Ireland	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-lords	My Lords, I will speak to Amendments 177, 179, 180, 182, 186, 188, 190, 191, 192, 193 and 194, which are in my name. We are moving away from fungi, but I say this to my noble friend the Minister: it is not helpful to group such a mass of contradictory and different issues together. My amendments deal with the supply chain and the collection and processing of data, which are rather different to what the noble Baroness was just talking about The Bill has incorporated some safeguards around the collection and processing of data to ensure that it is clear how information will be used and how it could be used in accordance with data protection legislation. However, I still have concerns that not all the purposes for which information can be processed relate directly to improving supply chain transparency or supporting the development of risk management tools to help farmers to manage volatility. I therefore want to see these purposes drafted in a more focused way to ensure that they achieve the legitimate aims of improving transparency and managing volatility The purpose for which information can be processed under this clause should be linked directly to the overarching objective of improving fairness and transparency in the supply chain. The requirements to provide information will inevitably lead to an increased administrative burden for businesses, and it is therefore important that any information collected is focused on helping those in the agri-food supply chain to make improvements—hence the need for Amendment 177 Turning to Amendment 190, the Bill as currently drafted provides for information to be processed for wider environmental and waste purposes which do not link specifically to assisting those in the agri-food supply chain. This amendment would focus the processing of environmental and waste information and avoid it being used to pursue wider environmental objectives more appropriately pursued under other legislation such as the Environment Bill. It would enable the Government to collect the kind of information they have stated they are interested in, but would curtail the use of the provisions for purposes which go beyond specific issues in the agri-food supply chain in future The Minister will know that the data collection provisions are welcomed by farmers. They should be used in a focused and proportionate way to ensure that the additional administrative burden placed on businesses directly improves the fairness and transparency of the agri-food supply chain. Most of us will be able to remember the days when MAFF was notorious for gold-plating regulations. Therefore, it is very important that these regulations and this part of the Bill are sensibly drafted so as not to impinge too much on farmers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-16-lords.u149	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-16	Sinclair, Malcolm	Amendments to improve supply chain fairness	2020-07-16 00:00:00	2020-07-16 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords	My Lords, I, too, congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, on her appointment. I would be happy to meet with the noble Baroness. It is key to remember that the relationships and health education guidance that the department has put out was put out partly in response to the IICSA inquiry, which recommended that relationships education was a way to protect children so they would know what was a healthy relationship and when someone was perhaps approaching them for ulterior motives.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-19-lords.u57	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-19	Berridge, Elizabeth Rose	Supporting child safety education guidelines	2020-10-19 00:00:00	2020-10-19 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for his very positive opening remarks and I hope, through some questions, to encourage him to do even more. I declare an interest as chair of the National Housing Federation, the trade body for housing associations This is the second time the House has debated this issue in recent months. Might that mean that it is high on the Government’s agenda? It certainly needs to be—the challenge is formidable. The National Housing Federation estimates a shortage of 4 million homes in England, with 340,000 new ones needed each year. Of those, 90,000 need to be for social rent Housing associations have a vital role to play in boosting supply. Research by Savills found that the Government will be unable to meet their own target of 300,000 new homes a year without investing in affordable housing. Significantly, the same report found that this investment supplements private development rather than displacing it. As the Letwin review concluded, greater diversity of tenure on large sites is crucial to building homes more quickly It should come as no surprise that housing associations are exploring the potential benefits of modern methods of construction, which have the potential to deliver consistently higher-quality products more quickly than on-site construction. The Minister mentioned Swan Housing Association, which set up an off-site factory. It resulted in a 50% time saving against traditional construction. There are other potential benefits: Swan’s off-site factory improved the quality of its homes while reducing waste by 90% and saving 10% in cost Other housing associations are also delivering the homes that people need by embracing modern methods of construction. Accord, a housing association operating through the West Midlands, set up its own off-site manufacturing arm. It delivers homes for Accord, for other housing associations and for local authorities that want to build. This business recently moved into a new factory with the capacity to produce up to 1,000 homes a year While there is an appetite in the sector to make off-site manufacturing a success, there are barriers preventing greater take-up and government has an important role to play in overcoming them. One barrier is the insecurity inherent in any new and developing industry. High start-up costs and small initial pipelines make off-site providers financially vulnerable. Off-site products are not often interchangeable, so it is difficult for buyers to switch between manufacturers should difficulties arise. This insecurity poses a risk to buyers but is of particular concern to housing associations, given their focus on the long-term sustainability of their properties. They want the certainty that they can access the parts needed to maintain their properties for tenants tomorrow, next year and for decades ahead. The construction sector is already taking steps to develop a common set of design features. This is not about creating rows of identical houses, but rather about creating a common set of blueprints for manufacturers. Will the Minister incentivise and support these efforts at standardisation across the sector, to increase the robustness of the market in the modern methods of construction A second barrier is the inconsistency of demand for off-site manufacturers, which undermines the prospect of economies of scale. Off-site manufacturing works best when there is already a drumbeat of demand rather than a series of peaks and troughs. Without a regular, reliable level of demand, off-site manufacturing just is not viable. As the Secretary of State acknowledges, housing associations are part of the solution here. Their ability to take a longer-term view of housing, outside commercial pressures, gives them an important role in providing certainty to off-site manufacturers. Housing associations from across England are coming together to aggregate demand for off-site housing. They have the foresight to see that by co-operating they can give off-site manufacturers the certainty they need to operate. In turn, they and their tenants will benefit from the advantages of off-site production. I would like to see much more of this, not least by encouraging partnership working between housing associations and local authorities. Will the Minister commit to supporting housing associations and local authorities to collaborate and aggregate their demand for homes, giving manufacturers the security of demand they need to develop Finally, I must briefly mention planning. Our current planning system was designed with traditional construction in mind, whereby on-site providers are contracted after planning permission is agreed. Off-site construction relies on automation, limiting its ability to respond to individual applications. This makes it particularly challenging for housing associations to use modem methods of construction, as they often buy land after planning permission has been granted. Sometimes, planners and planning committees incorrectly associate modern methods of construction with rows of identikit houses and with poor or uncertain quality Despite the barriers, however, there is a real appetite in the housing sector to realise the benefits of MMC. Housing associations across the country are already doing just that. But there is more to be done, and more that can be done with government support. Traditional construction will struggle to deliver the Government’s homebuilding target, but a robust MMC sector can help to deliver the homes that families across the country need. The housing shortage is too acute for us to ignore the opportunity that modern methods of construction offer to deliver more homes, of better quality, more quickly. Will the Minister therefore commit to supporting the sector in overcoming the barriers that hold back modern methods of construction and explain the actions that the Government intend to take to support it?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-24-lords.u131	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-24	Warwick, Diana Mary	Support modern construction for housing	2019-04-24 00:00:00	2019-04-24 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons	I am very sorry to hear of this situation, but as my hon. Friend will know, blanket restrictions on effective treatments are unacceptable. NHS England should take action if there is evidence of rationing of care, and if the CCG is breaching its statutory responsibility to provide services to the local population. He may like to seek an Adjournment debate so that he can raise this matter directly with a Health Minister.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-commons.u328	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-25	Leadsom, Andrea Jacqueline	Address NHS care concerns	2019-04-25 00:00:00	2019-04-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-lords	My Lords, the United Kingdom has played a crucial role in galvanising international efforts to secure justice for the Yazidi people and the many other victims of Daesh’s crimes in Iraq. This includes leadership in ensuring that the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2379 to establish a UN investigative team for the accountability of Daesh—UNITAD. The UK has now contributed £2 million to UNITAD, whose mandate was recently extended on 20 September for a further 12 months.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-23-lords.u31	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-23	Ahmad, Tariq	UK promotes justice for Yazidis	2019-10-23 00:00:00	2019-10-23 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords	That encapsulates the general concept of training, and the noble Lord is absolutely right that training is vital in how we address issues in these difficult and sensitive situations. The FCO has been extending training on the influence of faith in foreign policy, and we have commissioned the LSE Faith Centre to deliver a training course on religious literacy and we are introducing a series of regular seminars. We also invite other government departments, including DfID, to join this training.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-10-lords.u46	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-10	Goldie, Annabel	Faith-based foreign policy training	2019-07-10 00:00:00	2019-07-10 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-commons	My hon. Friend makes a good point about some of the dangers that coalminers faced at the coalface. In Clackmannanshire, which I represent, we still see not only the dangers that they faced back at the time, but the legacy and the long-term health impacts. Does he agree that it is time to review the fund and its distribution and that we should set regular reviews with actuarial advice to ensure that the distribution is fair and equitable in both good times and bad?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-10-commons.u372	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-10	Graham, Luke Patrick	Review coalminers' fund distribution	2019-06-10 00:00:00	2019-06-10 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons	It is the only way to be noticed, Mr Speaker I welcome the urgent question. For too long, the House has stood by and watched Venezuela, which should be a prosperous country, slip into tyranny and destitution. Did my right hon. Friend hear the comments made on the radio by Ken Livingstone, the former Labour Mayor of London? He said that the reason for the problems in Venezuela was that the Marxist regime, when it seized power, did not execute enough people.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons.u225	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-28	Bridgen, Andrew James	Venezuelan crisis, controversial comments discussed	2019-01-28 00:00:00	2019-01-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-09-commons	I agree with the hon. Lady. These issues were raised when the Lords considered the Bill. Front and centre of the social values charter in the Bill are things such as skills, opportunity, sustainability and a host of other important aspects. We must ensure these live not just when the games happen but for many years after, and I am sure we will debate this matter much further. I would encourage all colleagues to visit the organising committee. They would be very welcome. When I went up, I left inspired and confident that those issues—the longevity, the focus on skills, the opportunities for regeneration—were front of mind for everybody involved In conclusion, the Bill will help to deliver a Commonwealth games where transport keeps moving, commercial rights are protected and fans can be confident about the tickets they buy. It is critical that we get this right because the Commonwealth games are an important milestone for the region and the country. Just as we did in London, we will show the world that we are a hospitable, warm and tolerant country that is proud to host world-class sport, and we will leave a lasting legacy for Birmingham, the west midlands and the whole UK. That is what the Bill will do, and I commend it to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-09-commons.u300	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-09	Huddleston, Nigel Paul	Support for Commonwealth Games Bill	2020-03-09 00:00:00	2020-03-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons	I am not questioning the integrity of the Leader of the House, and I am sure that he is not questioning mine. It is just that this debate has been around for quite a long time, and the House of Commons Commission probably needs to meet more frequently and be able to transact business more expeditiously so that we can get on with this. The Finance Committee stands ready to do its share of the work, but honestly, some of us have been arguing for HR for a very long time.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons.u292	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-17	Bryant, Christopher John	Faster House of Commons meetings	2019-07-17 00:00:00	2019-07-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-lords	My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. I had the honour of responding to Baroness Jowell’s maiden speech on 23 May 2016. I looked it up in Hansard this morning. She recalled Seamus Heaney’s injunction to his wife: “‘Noli timere’—‘Do not be afraid’”. —[Official Report, 23/5/16; col. 167. ] As it turned out, we did not have long to wait for her to show how fearless she could be. I responded to her maiden speech by saying that I felt sure she would make her mark very soon. Sadly, she did not have as huge an amount of time to make her mark as I had expected—but nobody who was in the Chamber for her valedictory speech in January 2018 will ever forget her demonstration of total fearlessness 5-ALA received FDA approval for use in the USA on 3 July 2017, just over a year after Baroness Jowell joined your Lordships’ House. Use in the UK was given NICE approval on 10 July 2018, just two months after she died. I clearly welcome today’s announcement, but I have some questions for the Minister about 5-ALA and its rollout. What weight does NICE give to treatments that have received approval by the FDA? Is it usual for a treatment that is so obviously effective to wait nearly a year before being used routinely? Will it be universally available to all those who stand to benefit from it?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-13-lords.u85	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-13	Jolly, Judith Anne	Tribute to Baroness Jowell and 5-ALA	2019-05-13 00:00:00	2019-05-13 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-commons	The Chair of the Treasury Committee raises an extremely pertinent point, which I know my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has heard loud and clear. That is why we have seen repeatedly in the measures that the Chancellor has brought forward a targeting—particularly, as the Chair of the Select Committee says, in areas such as the hospitality sector, which have been acutely hit—with a package of measures, such as the cut in VAT and the package over the summer. For specific areas such as the independent cinema sector, there has been the £30 million of funding for the British Film Institute. That is an individual measure, but it does not address the much wider part of the cinema sector and the major chains. It is about looking at targeted measures of support in response to the issue that the Select Committee Chair raises.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-06-commons.u141	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-06	Barclay, Stephen Paul	Targeted economic support measures	2020-10-06 00:00:00	2020-10-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-lords	One of my sons has Crohn’s, a disease that many noble Lords will know results all too often in sufferers being caught drastically short in public. A particular charity issues them with a “Can’t Wait” card, which explains in simple terms why the holder has an urgent need for a toilet. It generally gains them speedy access to WCs in stores, restaurants and so forth—such is the kindness of strangers. Is there not room for a broadly similar scheme to be devised for taxi drivers by their association, at least in the medium and short term, to meet the ever increasing want of public conveniences?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-11-lords.u26	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-11	Brown, Simon Denis	Public convenience access for disabled	2019-04-11 00:00:00	2019-04-11 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords	But there are quite a lot. There is a lot of housing, the NEC, the airport—a host of difficulties for four-tracking. But if you do not four-track, you will not solve our major congestion problem The other option pointed out by my noble friend is the Chiltern line, a good line which many of us use when going to a different part of London. As he says, it would have to be four-tracked in certain places and would need to be electrified. My noble friend is doubtful about my railway geography, but the one thing I do know is that a lot of the Chiltern line goes through Buckinghamshire. Can you imagine what would happen if the Government announced that the alternative to increase capacity is four-tracking and electrifying the Chiltern line? All noble Lords who come from Buckinghamshire would rise in protest. The Chiltern line is saturated—	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-23-lords.u156	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-23	Hunt, Philip Alexander	Four-tracking for congestion relief	2020-01-23 00:00:00	2020-01-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-09-commons	It is a pleasure to be called, Mr Speaker. As a Member who was denied the opportunity to speak first time around, I am pleased finally to get the opportunity to speak up and set out my views on this important issue On the withdrawal agreement itself, I wish to focus on my main area of concern, which, unsurprisingly, is the backstop. There is no question but that the backstop has the potential to build a regulatory border in the Irish sea beyond that which already exists, although I accept that it would be in areas where divergence is fairly unlikely, such as industrial goods standards. While I am satisfied that the backstop will not create any new material differences between Great Britain and Northern Ireland on day one, it clearly provides a mechanism for those differences to appear and deepen over time. With no guarantee as to how long the backstop will operate, we will be in a constant political battle between loosening ties with the EU—and with it Northern Ireland—and keeping our country aligned and so failing to take back control in a variety of areas. Given that none of us can see into the future, I am concerned that the backstop will not future proof the integrity of the Union in the long term, if we find ourselves using it for more than a couple of years All these issues have been long rehearsed, so I will not dwell on them further, but the fact is that without a backstop there is no deal, and if there is no deal, there is no transition period. That is why I strongly welcome the paper the Government released today, which is probably the most explicitly Unionist statement by a UK Government in at least a couple of decades. I was grateful primarily because of the request I have made of numerous Secretaries of State that the Government continue to work at ensuring a role for the Northern Irish Assembly—and Executive, if it is sitting—as was included in paragraph 50 of the December joint report, in order to ensure regulatory divergence has an element of consent. There are areas, of course, where Northern Ireland would wish to follow new EU rules—for example, to protect the single energy market—but there will be an issue if that is imposed over the heads of the politicians and institutions of Northern Ireland, particularly where it creates new barriers or materially increases an existing barrier with Great Britain. I wonder, however, if the commitment to domestic legislation could be strengthened and whether there is some mechanism by which it could be incorporated into the withdrawal agreement to give the greater certainty that the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party are looking for Moving on to the political declaration, Opposition Members are right: it is thin and does not provide a clear pathway to what our future relationship will look like. Instead, it provides a spectrum of opportunities for where we could end up. It seems to point in a direction slightly looser than the Chequers deal, which was a proposal I was quite comfortable with when it was settled on. Ultimately, it kicks the can down the road on all the major issues until the middle of 2020 We have to be prepared for months of further argument on all these points domestically before we even get to the EU negotiating table, and those negotiations will be tough. I hope the Government have learned some lessons from this first phase of negotiations in terms of how they organise themselves and how they construct a negotiating position and work better with the various groupings in this Parliament so that when they properly start negotiating the second phase, they do so with a strong domestic mandate. That is the only way we will get a meaningful and lasting agreement with the EU that works I believe that the Prime Minister has reached the best deal that could have been achieved within the parameters set out in the negotiations. It is a compromise. It is not the deal that I wanted, but its acceptance would bring some certainty and allow us to move forward. It achieves many of the things that the EU said were not on the table. It is a bespoke arrangement that maintains industrial tariffs at zero and keeps us closely aligned but without the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Cherries have been picked and cake has certainly been eaten I come back to the fundamental point that it is risk to vote down the deal in the hope that something better will materialise. My inbox is full of emails from constituents asking me to vote down the deal but in order to get a range of different outcomes, and they cannot all get what they want. For me, this is not about rolling the dice. It is not about whether I or my constituents who use 38 Degrees can afford for the gamble not to come off and to end up somewhere worse. I have to make this call in the interests of the 90,000 people of East Renfrewshire, where there are wildly different views and personal circumstances. Many of my constituents simply cannot afford for this not to work out. If I were to vote against the deal, and if no other magical solution arrived and we crashed out in March, I would feel wholly responsible for the economic impact on families and communities in my constituency that would result. I fully appreciate the range of views across the House, but I do not personally feel that I could be complicit in that outcome, and I will therefore support the deal on Tuesday A vote against the deal is not a vote to stop Brexit—if it were, dozens of my colleagues would not be preparing to bring it down—but, facing all the facts, I think that it seems likely to be rejected. Let me repeat a statement that I have always made, and which, indeed, I made at my selection meeting in 2017: I will not support a no-deal Brexit. In East Renfrewshire, 75% voted to remain in the European Union. Mine is the highest remain-voting seat held by a Conservative. My election was not the result of a promise in our manifesto to deliver Brexit but the result of a promise to protect the Union, and the greatest threat of the Union is a chaotic no-deal Brexit If the deal is voted down, I will work with colleagues on both sides of the House to put in place an achievable plan B. I will continue to argue for my preferred alternative of remaining in the European economic area as a member of the European Free Trade Association, with a bespoke customs protocol to protect the position in Northern Ireland. I will argue for a rejection of the political institutions of the EU but a retention of the principles at the heart of why we joined: a Common Market 2.0. We will need the withdrawal agreement for that, but I make a commitment to my constituents to re-evaluate my position with a genuinely open mind I urge the Prime Minister, if the deal is defeated, to announce immediately that there will be indicative votes on a series of options, on a free vote, so that we can properly test the mood of the House. In the weeks ahead, I will vote in the manner that secures a sensible and orderly exit from the European Union, and sets us on a pathway to a future relationship that works for East Renfrewshire and every part of our United Kingdom. I will vote—not just on Tuesday, but in every vote thereafter—in the manner that I consider to be in the best interests of this great nation. Ultimately, that is the only way I shall be able to go home from this place and look my constituents, and my children, in the eye, knowing that I did what I felt was right for them and their futures. There are many Conservative Members who, like me, voted to remain but accept, admittedly reluctantly and with some misgivings, that we are leaving the European Union. We have compromised at every stage of the process to try to find a way to make this work, and the deal before us is as far as I am prepared to go. If some of my colleagues want to blow this up in pursuit of an ideologically purist fantasy, fine—go ahead—but I am done. My patience and good will will be gone, along with the patience and good will of many other Conservative Members Would it not be something if, when the history books are written, it emerged that it was owing to the arrogance and belligerence of the hard-line Brexiteers in refusing to compromise that, rather than ending up with this imperfect Brexit, they ended up with no Brexit at all?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-09-commons.u470	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-09	Masterton, Paul	Support for Brexit deal	2019-01-09 00:00:00	2019-01-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-05-commons	I thank the right hon. Lady for her letter. As she knows, the Government and Ministers do not comment on security clearance, but the insinuation in her letter that No. 10 is somehow in the grip of a Kremlin mole is frankly ridiculous, even by the standards of the loony left. What is troubling is that the leader of the Labour party sided with the Kremlin when it denied responsibility for the nerve agent attack in Salisbury in 2018—one more reason why this Labour party, under this leader, can never be trusted with Britain’s security.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-05-commons.u43	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-11-05	Raab, Dominic Rennie	Labour party cannot be trusted	2019-11-05 00:00:00	2019-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	57	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons	It is a great pleasure to have the opportunity to present my case today, on behalf of Peterborough United football club, to be able to have a limited number of supporters attending their home matches. Let me make it absolutely clear at the outset that in putting forward the case to allow spectators, I do so with the intention of that happening after the lifting of the present restrictions. I wish to inform the thinking of the Minister so that when the easing of restrictions does take place, serious consideration can be given to opening up football stadiums in a limited manner, provided that proper social distancing and safety measures are implemented Earlier this year, pubs, restaurants, clubs, cafés and other venues were opened up after the period of the lockdown, but football stadiums were not. This time round, I hope it will be different, and I would like to put forward some reasons as to why I believe that should be so, with specific reference to Peterborough United FC, affectionately known as the Posh. I have the privilege of having the club in my constituency of North West Cambridgeshire, which has in it some 40% of the total population covered by Peterborough City Council The club was formed in 1934, and after winning the Midland league title for five consecutive seasons, they were elected to the Football League in 1960. Currently, the club are at the top of league 1. The story behind the name “Posh” is an interesting one. Although the present club dates back to 1934, the Posh name first came to the fore over a decade earlier, almost certainly coming from Pat Tirrell, who was player manager of Fletton United, the previous users of the present club’s London Road ground. Pat announced at the end of the 1921 season that he was looking for “Posh players for a Posh team” to compete in Northamptonshire league, which subsequently became the United Counties league. Fletton United had previously been known as the “Brickies”. They reformed as Peterborough and Fletton United in 1923, and both nicknames were in use throughout the 1920s. Following the demise of Peterborough and Fletton United in 1932, the present club was formed two years later. There then followed a Midland league debut against Gainsborough Trinity on 1 September 1934, and this was greeted with shouts of “up the Posh” from the spectators The current owners of the club, Darragh MacAnthony, who is also chairman of the club, Jason Neale and Stewart Thompson, are totally committed to the Posh, as are the manager Darren Ferguson, chief executive officer Bob Symns and director of football Barry Fry. The city of Peterborough and surrounding area benefit economically and socially from the club’s continued success, drawing in millions of pounds of revenue every year, helping local tourism and making a huge contribution through the Peterborough United Foundation. It is not surprising, therefore, that the club enjoys the support of Peterborough City Council. Incidentally, the leader of Peterborough City Council, Councillor John Holdich, is retiring next year after over 40 years of public service. I thank Councillor Holdich for his outstanding dedication and commitment to the city and the surrounding area. I wish him and his wife Barbara much happiness following his retirement The covid-19 pandemic has been a massive challenge for us all, and has resulted in an unprecedented challenge for all football clubs. Of course, many other sports have also been affected, but I am confining my comments today to football, and specifically to the Posh. As we move forwards, and in anticipation of an easing of restrictions, the Posh’s CEO Bob Symns and his team have put an enormous amount of work into making preparations for a return to socially distanced competition at the Weston Homes stadium, where the club plays. The plans are intensely thorough and detailed, covering all aspects of how the stadium would operate on match days, with a reduced crowd and working on the basis of ensuring maximum safety for all concerned The stadium covers some 5 acres and has a maximum capacity of 15,000 spectators, but the club seeks permission to make provision for only 4,000 of its followers, and they are all season ticket holders. In the event that any one of those individuals needs to be contacted—for example, for test and trace purposes—the club has everyone’s contact details, including mobile numbers, email addresses and so on As for the preparations, entry to and departure from the stadium would be staggered. Every seat and every space in and around the ground and the stadium has been accounted for on a socially distanced basis. There is provision for single spectators, those arriving in twos, threes and so on. There is plenty of signage and hand sanitiser stations, and there are unique protocols and procedures for the various different areas and facilities. These include the entrance and exit points, home and away dressing rooms, the players’ tunnel, areas for the media and catering, car parking areas, turnstiles, the ticket office—the list goes on. There will be full deep-cleaning of the stadium, including the benches, control room, staff areas, media places and the like. These deep cleans will take place prior to and at the end of each match day. There will also be ongoing cleaning of some areas, such as toilets, entrances, door handles and light switches, between fixtures As one would expect in such circumstances, the club has made risk assessments, put in place contingency plans, provided for the proper training of staff, and ensured that there is an effective communication procedure and system. No detail has been overlooked, and that point is clearly made when I say that during matches there will be eight people whose sole responsibility will be to ensure that the balls used during the match are properly sanitised. Of course, if the club is going to do a proper job, it almost goes without saying that the corner flags and goalposts will also be thoroughly sanitised. As well as all these safety measures, a crucial point that I very much hope the Minister will take on board is that, unlike many other types of venues that were previously allowed to open to the public, the Posh’s stadium, and football stadiums generally around the country, are in the open air. They are therefore that much safer for fans and for all others attending In its preparations, the club has also worked very closely with other stakeholders. These include the Sports Grounds Safety Authority, the safety advisory group, the local fire and police services and the medical providers, including the ambulance service. Having read and considered the proposals, and after several conversations with Mr Symns, I can truly say that I believe that Peterborough United FC has provided a template that can be safely used by any club throughout the country. Let me add that when speaking with Mr Darragh MacAnthony, he assured me of his total determination to do whatever it takes to ensure that safety guidelines are adhered to, and said that the safety of everyone is of paramount importance on match days and more generally Moreover, Darren Ferguson, the club manager, also made it clear to me that he and all the players are totally committed to making this work. During training sessions rigorous measures are taken to ensure compliance with safety rules, and all the players are fully aware of their own responsibility in making sure that the message of health and safety and social distancing is effectively conveyed and adhered to by all the fans attending. My hon. Friend the Minister will also appreciate that currently there is no income for the Posh and many other clubs, and it is therefore absolutely vital that they are allowed to generate some much-needed revenue after such a long period without money coming in One aspect of the club’s work that does not receive as much attention as it ought to is the work carried out by Peterborough United Foundation, which makes a real and positive difference to the wider community. The values of the foundation are to ensure opportunities for everyone regardless of age, gender, ethnicity or ability, and its activities are centred around four themes: sports participation, social inclusion and community cohesion, health, and education The foundation’s activities include a school sports programme with after-school clubs and PE lessons, currently working with some 13 primary schools and delivering each week to around 1,000 children. Another programme involves going into schools and helping the development of teachers delivering PE, as well as helping children to gain important life skills, using four particular themes: to be ambitious, to be inspiring, to be fair, and to be connected There is, of course, a Peterborough United ladies’ team, as well as opportunities for girls who have experience of playing football to gain even more training at the Peterborough United girls elite and development centre, and there is also a programme for girls aged 11-plus, the majority of whom have not played football or taken part in much physical activity before. These girls and women come from a variety of backgrounds and abilities, and the foundation seeks to provide them with as many opportunities as possible to participate in football. The disability coaching programme covers both school and out-of-school sessions, and the foundation supports an adult deaf team that competes in the English deaf league south division, as well as providing coaching sessions for children who are deaf and hearing-impaired There is more. There is support for an adult amputee team, which competes in the English amputee football league. There are “healthy kicking days”, too; children take part in activities that teach them how to keep healthy and active and what foods to eat to maintain a healthy diet. Enterprise days are hugely popular, providing children with an opportunity to meet and work with many other children from different schools whom they would not normally see. A local organisation, Locate Accommodation, helps refugees who come to Peterborough, and the foundation offers football sessions to them over the summer holidays. Let it not be said that there is not provision for all age groups, because there is. There is walking football. The sessions are for participants of any age and are ideal for those who wish to continue playing football, but in a more relaxed, non-competitive and non-contact manner Opening up the club to spectators, even in a limited way, would serve another important purpose. It would allow the club to celebrate the life of Tommy Robson and his contribution to the Posh and the city. Last month, very sadly, Tommy passed away. He was a much-loved and admired Posh legend, and the first player to be inducted into the club’s hall of fame Tommy played for Northampton Town, Chelsea and Newcastle United before signing for the Posh in 1968 for a transfer fee of £20,000. He made 482 league appearances for the club and was twice named player of the season. Tommy later dedicated much of his working life to Peterborough and earlier this year was awarded the freedom of the city. Councillor Peter Hiller tabled a motion on Tommy’s award and said: “Tommy is without doubt one of if not the most loved players ever to grace the pitch at London Road. ” The club has started a campaign to raise funds to erect a bronze statue of Tommy outside the club grounds. This would join a statue of Chris Turner, which stands outside the stadium. Chris was formerly a player, the manager and chairman of the club. Tommy’s son, Ian, has said that his father “had an awful lot of love for the city and clearly the people loved him. ” Tommy’s daughter, Anita, added: “I always knew he was a special man but to realise he was special to everyone up and down the country has been absolutely amazing. ” The chairman of the Posh supporters’ trust, Marco Graziano, has spoken of the chance for fans to pay their respects to Tommy inside the stadium When the present restrictions are released and restaurants, pubs, cafes, theatres, shops and a whole variety of places are opened up again, I very much hope that the Minister—who is not only a colleague, but a very good friend of mine, and for whom I have a huge amount of respect—will give serious thought to the points that I have made, especially the fact that, unlike many other venues, football stadiums and the grounds where Posh play are in open areas without any closed roofs or ceilings. I hope, too, that he will appreciate that that helps towards enhancing safety measures I invite the Minister to come to the Posh stadium himself, and to bring along his advisers and civil servants, so he can see personally what measures have been put in place. He can challenge and ask Mr Symns and others if he has any concerns. Above all, he can come to see the enormous work that has been put in place to ensure that Posh players can play safely, and spectators can come to enjoy watching the matches.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-12-commons.u399	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-12	Vara, Shailesh Lakhman	Support limited fans at matches	2020-11-12 00:00:00	2020-11-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-lords	Will the Government ensure that they do not lurch suddenly into new guidelines over the Christmas period or, as has happened with the imminent lockdown, repeatedly say something will not happen and then suddenly do a U-turn, so that the police and communities have time to prepare properly for what is expected of them over Christmas? Following up a point already made, what is the latest date the Government would deem acceptable for stating clearly what restrictions will and will not apply over the Christmas period, whether they be new arrangements or a continuation of those already applying?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-03-lords.u83	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-11-03	Rosser, Richard Andrew	Clear Christmas restrictions early	2020-11-03 00:00:00	2020-11-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons	If Government Members want to tell me why spending £900,000 on a plane is more important than feeding children—[Interruption. ] All of it is too much. All of it is unnecessary; when there are children in my constituency and constituencies throughout the country not having food to put on the table, money spent on redecorating a plane is a shame that should stain this Government As I was saying, the Scottish Government have taken child poverty incredibly seriously. They have set in statute the commitment to eradicate child poverty by 2030, with concrete action in the child poverty delivery plan backed by the £50 million tackling child poverty fund. Child poverty in Scotland had fallen, but it has been on the rise since the Conservatives took over in 2010. Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation directly attributes this rise to welfare policy. In addition, the policies outwith the control of the Scottish Government, such as no recourse to public funds, cause significant poverty among people who are working. Constituents come to my office who cannot put food on the table for their children and who are struggling to pay their bills. Some have come to my office several years in a row to apply for the Christmas presents fund that is run in Glasgow, because even though they are working, they are not entitled to the benefits that their neighbours get; two children may sit next to one another in the classroom but one will go without because one family has no recourse to public funds. The Government must rethink this, because we have seen through the coronavirus crisis that people with no recourse to public funds find it more difficult to support themselves through this time.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-02-commons.u349	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-02	Thewliss, Alison Emily	Child poverty vs. government spending	2020-07-02 00:00:00	2020-07-02 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons	I inform the House that Mr Speaker has selected the amendment in the name of Valerie Vaz. I should also inform the House that the Order Paper today should refer to the report of the House of Commons Commission, “Lay Members of the Committee on Standards: Nomination of Candidates”, HC 437.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons.u422	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Laing, Eleanor Fulton	Amendment selected report error noted	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons	We ask all parents to look at the advice given by Public Health England. Obviously, there are many grandparents who are very young and healthy, but we need parents to consider the individual circumstances of their family to make the best assessment. We need to protect those who are most vulnerable and, of course, the most vulnerable are those over the age of 70 and those with underlying health conditions.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-18-commons.u350	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-18	Williamson, Gavin Alexander	Protect elderly and vulnerable	2020-03-18 00:00:00	2020-03-18 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-lords	My Lords, my contribution to this debate on Amendment 59 will be very brief, because everyone has said what I want to say. I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, for tabling this amendment and giving me the opportunity to add my name to it. I am also grateful for the detailed analysis that he and the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, provided, and for the comments of the noble Baroness The independent monitoring authority for citizens' rights will, as noble Lords have outlined, be composed of an independent board of members with experience of matters covered by the citizens’ rights agreements, and—this is important—knowledge of the relevant laws and issues in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and, I believe, Gibraltar. As the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, pointed out, it is important to note that these qualifications for membership of the IMA are the result of many hours of negotiation between the Government and the devolved Administrations. The qualifications have been taken very seriously. The amendment seeks to ensure that if the functions of the IMA are transferred to another body, the same qualifications for membership of the new body should apply. This seems to be an eminently sensible, simple and straightforward request. I hope that the Minister can commit to it from the Dispatch Box tonight.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-14-lords.u189	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-14	Humphreys, Christine	Support for Amendment 59 qualifications	2020-01-14 00:00:00	2020-01-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-commons	I thank my hon. Friend for the work that he has done on this issue. It has been noted and appreciated. He is absolutely right; from memory, it is question 57 of the Law Commission’s review of this precise issue. I hope that that work progresses. The extraordinary thing about football is that so much of an advance has been seen in respect of racism, yet homophobia still seems to exist, although I have to say that there is much better work going on in the women’s game than the men’s. The men need to catch up.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-commons.u36	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-08	Chalk, Alexander John Gervase	Homophobia persists in men's football	2020-12-08 00:00:00	2020-12-08 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-09-commons	It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Redcar (Jacob Young) making his maiden speech. He has shown that he potentially has a long career ahead of him representing Redcar—certainly a longer stint than I hope to have representing my constituency in this place. He mentioned the Domesday Book, and I cannot be alone in thinking that these times of Brexit must have their own chapter in that book. Whatever his political persuasions, I am sure that he is not a single-use politician and that he will have a great career in this Parliament, so I wish him well for the coming years I will not detain the House for long, particularly as sport is a devolved matter and Members from Birmingham, the midlands and across England will want to speak. Suffice it to say that the Glasgow games were a world-leading event, as the Minister touched on. They were not only a sporting event but a celebration of the many cultures and people who have chosen to make Scotland their home. I hope that the Birmingham games, in a city that is also renowned for its diversity, will similarly go beyond the purely sporting aspects, cast the net wider afield and use the occasion to showcase their city and their culture Glasgow had dozens of giant dancing Tunnock’s tea cakes at its opening ceremony, so I look forward to the sight of scores of pikelets and pease puddings pirouetting under the lights at the Alexander stadium in 2022. My wife and I were fortunate enough to be at the opening ceremony at Parkhead, after she won a pair of tickets in a local radio competition. The hardest part of that day was trying to get away from work in time, but I was lucky enough to do so.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-09-commons.u308	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-03-09	Newlands, Gavin Andrew Stuart	Praising Jacob Young and Birmingham games	2020-03-09 00:00:00	2020-03-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons	The Chancellor must be peeved that his grand announcement yesterday received such a mixed response, with many industry bodies saying it is insufficient. When we debate these plans on Monday, will the Leader of the House try to persuade his right hon. Friend to listen to others and seek consensus? It is increasingly bizarre that the Chancellor insists on a one-size-fits-all approach to business support, when everyone else knows that different sectors are affected differently. The fact is that, come the autumn, there will be many businesses which would in normal circumstances be perfectly viable that cannot trade because of public health restrictions. As the chief strategist of J. P. Morgan said yesterday: “Removing the furlough scheme before activity has recovered is like building three quarters of a bridge and not finishing it because it is becoming expensive” Secondly, I want to ask again for a debate on the financial straitjacket under which the devolved Administrations are forced to operate. Every time I ask about devolution powers, the Leader of the House gives me an answer about money. I am not sure if he is evading the question or he does not understand it. The fiscal framework of devolution was not designed to respond to a global pandemic, and it needs to be changed. To give this week’s example, the arts rescue package announced on Monday includes repurposing capital spending in England, so why will the Government not allow the Scottish Government to do the same? We hear from many Cabinet members that Scotland’s salvation is due to the strong arms of the Union, implying that only big countries can deal with the pandemic, but that is not true. In fact, many small countries have proven more agile and effective, but if the Leader of the House does believe this, can he explain why support for Scotland becoming an independent country is now running at 54%, an all-time historical high Finally, can the Leader of the House confirm whether, in next week’s debate about restoration and renewal, the Government will bring forward their own, revised plans? In particular, does he believe that the decision to build a complete replica of the House of Commons Chamber for a temporary decant is profligate and ought to be reviewed?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-09-commons.u195	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-09	Sheppard, Thomas	Chancellor's plans inadequate; devolution limitations	2020-07-09 00:00:00	2020-07-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords	My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who raised climate issues in relation to pension schemes during our proceedings, especially those involved in the cross-party talks led by the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, and my noble friend Lady Jones of Whitchurch. I also thank the Minister for listening and moving on from the broad government amendments brought forward in Committee This Bill has been on a journey. When it was first published there was no reference to climate change at all. Indeed, from having been given advice from the Library, I understand that climate change has never been included in domestic pensions legislation before in this country, so we are making history here today The Labour Benches had two priorities on this: first, to provide clarity on climate risk by ensuring that the Paris Agreement is referenced; and secondly, to ensure that trustees and managers take international climate treaties into account when making decisions. The word “account” is clearly significant. It recalls the Court of Appeal judgment that found that the Government had failed to take into account the Paris Agreement when permitting the Heathrow expansion. That was a good example of the need to make sure that positive action on the international level to combat climate change is not forgotten when Ministers make domestic policy decisions Our priorities are reflected in Amendments 73 and 79, but because we have secured cross-party consensus with the Government, they are also reflected in the government amendments in this group, especially Amendments 75 and 76. I will be interested to hear the Minister’s reply to the questions from the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, about whether these refer also to the physical impacts of climate change and the impact of steps taken to transition towards a low-carbon economy, and for clarification that Amendment 76 includes the UK’s net-zero target However, as my noble friend Lady Jones said, we are only at the beginning of a journey to net zero. Divesting pension funds away from fossil fuels is a big challenge. The Government and the industry need to go further and quicker, with aligning investment strategies with domestic and international targets being the ultimate goal. For this Bill, we have reached a good place with broad cross-party support. I look forward to the Minister’s reply.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords.u171	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-30	Sherlock, Maeve Christina Mary	Cross-party support for climate action	2020-06-30 00:00:00	2020-06-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons	I think I have been outlining that. The Church actually provides youth workers in our communities where many have fallen away, and it continues to support the presence of such role models in our society, as is recognised by the Government. I could give the hon. Gentleman a whole series of examples of how the Government’s community fund is being used, through churches, to deliver knife crime awareness training and to help to tackle this problem. Indeed, many churches provide amnesty boxes for weapons that may otherwise cause people to lose their lives.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-20-commons.u141	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-20	Spelman, Caroline Alice	Churches aid youth and safety	2019-06-20 00:00:00	2019-06-20 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-07-lords	I accept that there is a ladder of escalation, which starts with sanctions that gradually move up in their impact. I disagree slightly with the noble Baroness on the strength of the recommendations in the Timpson report. For me, the stand-out recommendation is number 14: “DfE should make schools responsible for the children they exclude and accountable for their educational outcomes” This has the potential to be a very powerful change, but Timpson has cautioned us to be careful in how we implement it, because of the adverse behaviours that it might create.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-05-07-lords.u115	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-05-07	Agnew, Theodore	Support Timpson recommendation cautiously	2019-05-07 00:00:00	2019-05-07 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-lords	My noble friend outlines some of the complexities of this. It is not in our purview to go and destroy boats that are not on our soil. They quite often come from France, as my noble friend said. On not landing in the UK, it is an internationally accepted arrangement that the first job of any maritime force, whether Border Force or whoever it is, to save lives at sea. That is a really important thing here. I will repeat what I said in the first instance: on taking someone somewhere else, when people are taken safely on to our soil we are obliged to hear and deal with their asylum claim. This is a problem for every state in the EU: we need to work, together with our partners, to deal with some of the problems of upstream criminality. The reason why people get on to these boats and take perilous journeys is that criminality, unfortunately, is at the heart of it.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-lords.u193	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-09-03	Williams, Susan	Maritime safety and asylum obligations	2020-09-03 00:00:00	2020-09-03 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons	I would say the same thing in reply to my hon. Friend: I believe that the Cornish have a unique claim in this regard, because it is the only UK national identity affected that is formally recognised by the Council of Europe under the framework convention for the protection of national minorities, which has been fully accepted and endorsed by the UK Government. I therefore think that there is a unique case for Cornish that perhaps does not apply to other ethnic identities. I say that in no way to belittle or denigrate other national identities, but—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-17-commons.u271	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-17	Double, Stephen Daniel	Unique Cornish identity recognition	2019-07-17 00:00:00	2019-07-17 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons	My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. We are and remain deeply concerned by the recent reports of the renewed wave of persecution of LGBT folk in Chechnya. Both the Foreign Secretary and my right hon. Friend the Minister for Europe and the Americas have in the past week made it clear to their Russian counterparts that we must stop such persecution and hold those responsible to account.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons.u11	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-22	Field, Mark Christopher	Concern over LGBT persecution in Chechnya	2019-01-22 00:00:00	2019-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-23-commons	The Minister says that she wants the user at the heart of the system. Under this Government, Wrexham in north-east Wales is run by an administrator in Llanelli in south-west Wales. That has led to our having a magistrates court without any cells—the equivalent of a pub without any beer—and the result is that the users have to go to a different town. All of this is as a result of Ministry of Justice incompetence. How can we have confidence in the administration of the justice system when this sort of chaos is an everyday occurrence?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-23-commons.u170	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-23	Lucas, Ian Colin	Justice system chaos incompetence	2019-01-23 00:00:00	2019-01-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-commons	Yes, the hon. Lady is right. We have seen a surge in unlicensed music events across the whole country as two things happened. First, young people have a natural desire to be sociable, but for them, the rock concert/festival schedule was abandoned. However, at the same time, in one or two instances, there is perhaps initial evidence to show that those involved in the drugs industry are co-ordinating these events as a natural place in which they can sell drugs. Dealing with that was behind the regulations that the Government introduced to impose £10,000 fixed penalty notices on those who organise such gatherings. As she will know, a number of those penalty notices have been handed out. With unlicensed music events, the police have powers to confiscate equipment, and they very often do so. Sadly, however, despite the fact that such equipment costs several thousand pounds, they are under a duty to return it in time. I did wonder whether we could either take our time returning it or find some other use for it, to act as a suitable disincentive to organising such events, but the £10,000 fixed penalty notice was apparently more powerful Since then, there has been a reduction in unlicensed music events. Some of that has related to—let us say—assertive action by the police, and the change in the regulatory environment. It has also, frankly, related to the weather. As the Under-Secretary of State for Wales, my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth (David T. C. Davies), who is sitting in the Whip’s place, will know—he has been, in the past, a special constable of some note—the police often refer to their greatest friend and ally in fighting crime as PC Rain. The weather will, we hope, have a depressive effect on such events over the autumn. Alongside all the powers, however, the hon. Lady is quite right to say that there is an urgent desire in London, in particular, and in the whole country for a greater sense of police presence. People want much more assurance that public space is governed and controlled. That desire is a large part of what lies behind our pledge to recruit 20,000 more police officers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-07-commons.u246	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-07	Malthouse, Christopher Laurie	Crackdown on unlicensed music events	2020-10-07 00:00:00	2020-10-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-lords	My Lords, I welcome the changes that the Government have made to Part 4 of the Bill, reducing the duration of the proposed regulation to 3 February. I also welcome the frequency with which the imposition of tiers 2 and 3 is to be reviewed, but the Government have come far too late to the notion that they must take Parliament and the people with them. The three tiers are not the 10 commandments, to be handed down on tablets of stone by Matt Hancock in the role of Moses. Surely, the Government should try hard on the impact assessment. After eight months of lockdowns, circuit breakers and tiers, anxiety has inevitably spread about the impact of these restrictions, not just on Covid but on the very nature of social life I remember a time when my generation could aspire to a higher standard of living than our parents. Now, we have to ask whether, with the debt already incurred, not only our children but our grandchildren will be able to enjoy a prosperity greater than ours. The rise in unemployment, family breakdown, child abuse, loneliness, mental health problems, leaving aside the damage to the economy and to education, increasingly poses the question of whether the cure is worse than the disease. We must approach the answer with humanity and humility. Science takes us only so far. The answer does not lie in statistics, data or graphs when the experts themselves cannot agree on their interpretation There are profound ethical and philosophical judgments to be made on the value of personal liberty, freedom of choice and the quality of life. Some fear, not without reason, that the draconian nature of lockdowns and tiers is taking us down the slippery slope to an authoritarian state from which we will never return. These value judgments go well beyond the realm of government—any Government. It is all too easy for commentators to say, from the rigid and unrealistic certitudes of their views, that the Government have no strategy, but name one nation that has a strategy. All over Europe, Presidents, Prime Ministers and Parliaments wrestle with the same problems and come up with the same answers The simple truth is that Covid-19 has a life of its own. It therefore holds the initiative. It is the fate of all of us to have to react to the unpredictable twists and turns of Covid. Mankind can turn the tables on the virus only with a vaccine that works. With the advent of such a vaccine, many of the fears and anxieties should fall away, but we must not count our vaccines until they are hatched. Before the first needle enters an arm, a vaccine must pass through the hoops of approval, manufacture, storage, transportation and distribution. That will take months, and, in the interval, we will have to put up with restrictions of one kind or another All I ask is for the Government to remember one thing: the more responsibility we are given, the more responsible we are. If we are treated like children, we will end up behaving like children. The British people are pragmatic and sensible. They are the Government’s partners in this confrontation and they should be consulted at every significant stage To follow up on what the noble Baroness, Lady Watkins of Tavistock, said about international travel, can the Minister tell us what the position will be over the Christmas period for people whose families live abroad? For example, will my children be able to visit us or will they have to spend five days locked in our flat in London?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-01-lords.u192	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-01	Meyer, Catherine	Criticizes Covid restrictions and impact	2020-12-01 00:00:00	2020-12-01 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-lords	My Lords, it is essential to maintain development aid in this desperately poor country, as were it to collapse the illicit economy would also almost certainly take over. However, can the Minister tell the House what position the UK Government will take at the pledging conference he mentioned just now in Geneva in November on conditions with respect to corruption and human rights?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-15-lords.u29	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-15	Blackstone, Tessa Ann Vosper	Maintain aid, address corruption concerns	2020-10-15 00:00:00	2020-10-15 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LI	Labour Independent	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons	Exactly. I could not agree more. It is absolutely shocking that so many families in this country are so reliant on food banks and other emergency food provision in this day and age As the EAC found when we looked into this issue, no Department has included domestic hunger and food security in its single departmental plan. It has very much fallen through the cracks and, as I have said, it is viewed only as an overseas issue. Whether intentionally or not, the Government are giving the distinct impression that they do not want to acknowledge or to tackle the crisis at hand. It was very telling that when we had I think four Ministers from various Departments in front of us for the inquiry—	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-11-commons.u371	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-11	McCarthy, Kerry Gillian	Domestic hunger ignored by Government	2019-06-11 00:00:00	2019-06-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons	Does my right hon. Friend agree that rail operators must act responsibly during the pandemic to ensure that passengers do not have to choose between a journey on an overcrowded train and paying the top rates for anytime travel tickets? On the west coast line, for example, travel between London and Stoke-on-Trent rises from £53 to £129 after 3 pm, and only returns to £53 at 7 pm, when the trains are packed. Surely a temporary suspension of peak fares while the country is in a national health emergency is the right thing to do to protect rail travellers.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-29-commons.u460	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-29	Gideon, Joanna Mary	Suspend peak rail fares	2020-09-29 00:00:00	2020-09-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons	The hon. Gentleman was rather better when he was supporting the Government action in the first part of his response. He cannot seem to decide whether he is in favour of more testing, or against it. All we get is complaint after complaint, rather than support for his constituents and the people of this country in our quest to get through this virus First, on who is eligible for a test, precisely as I said and as he literally read out, if you have symptoms, get a test. If you do not have symptoms, you are not eligible for a test, unless specifically asked for one. [Hon. Members: “If in doubt! ”] Yes, if you have symptoms and are in doubt about whether those symptoms are coronavirus, get a test. If you do not have symptoms, do not get a test. That has not changed. It is exactly the same. What has changed is that the hon. Member for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth) does not know whether he is coming or going The hon. Gentleman does not seem to understand that the way in which we build a huge project like our testing, which is at record levels, is to back all the horses. Once again, he complained about businesses supporting us in our roll-out of mass testing. That divisive approach is wrong. We support universities, businesses and the NHS to deliver more testing; we do not support the totally confused approach of the Opposition. He does not know whether he is in favour of or against more testing The hon. Gentleman asked about the money, and £500 million has thus far been allocated to this project, but more is likely. He asked about staff testing in the NHS. As he well knows, we follow clinical advice, but always keep it under review. Finally, he asked about schools. The policy on schools is that, if somebody tests positive, that bubble needs to self-isolate. A bubble is defined as those who are in close contact within a school setting I will end on a point on which we agree strongly. On this, World Suicide Prevention Day, all of us are united in support of the mental health services provided across this country, and of all those who are working hard for those with mental ill health or at risk of suicide. That is a project on which all of us are on the same side and working together to support people.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-10-commons.u239	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-10	Hancock, Matthew John David	Testing policy and opposition confusion	2020-09-10 00:00:00	2020-09-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons	The Prime Minister and the Government have been faced with a crisis the like of which we have not seen since world war two. Despite everything, they have kept our NHS safe and casualties to a minimum, and the economy continues to function. Will the Prime Minister commit 100% to my constituents on Ynys Môn to do everything he can to prevent a second UK-wide lockdown, and join me in thanking them for their incredible effort in keeping our island's infection rates down?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-12-commons.u219	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-10-12	Crosbie, Virginia Ann	Prevent second lockdown	2020-10-12 00:00:00	2020-10-12 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons	When the Home Secretary was appointed he told this House that it was his first priority to help those affected by the Windrush situation. That was in July last year—over seven months ago. The consultation ended on 16 November, but he still cannot—or will not—tell us when the final details of the scheme will be announced. If this is how he treats his first priority, I would hate to think how he treats the others. When can my constituents expect the compensation they so desperately need and deserve?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-25-commons.u33	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-02-25	Greenwood, Lilian Rachel	Windrush compensation delay criticized	2019-02-25 00:00:00	2019-02-25 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons	I thank the hon. Lady for her question. We have always been very clear-eyed about the challenge posed by Huawei. She will be aware that, following the US announcement of additional sanctions against that company, the National Cyber Security Centre has been looking carefully at any impact that it could have on the UK’s networks. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has received that advice and will respond in due course. She is right to raise serious concerns about the human rights situation in Xinjiang.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-29-commons.u243	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-06-29	Adams, Nigel	Huawei challenge and Xinjiang concerns	2020-06-29 00:00:00	2020-06-29 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-commons	This is a very big challenge. There is huge potential for the British economy and, of course, for the world and the climate emergency in getting involved in new technologies. To take one example, I would very much like to put considerably more money from DFID into research and development in renewable technologies at British universities. If we can develop the next generation of solar film—light spectrum technology —it can convince China not to build the next generation of coal-fired stations. That will make a huge difference to the climate and the world, but also to British research.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-06-commons.u123	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-06-06	Stewart, Roderick James Nugent	Promote renewable tech investment	2019-06-06 00:00:00	2019-06-06 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords	My Lords, we are calling on the Iranian Government to immediately give detained British-Iranian dual nationals access to appropriate medical treatment and our colleagues in Tehran will continue to lobby for the temporary release of all our detainees in Evin Prison. Of course, it is important that we support Iran as best we can. We have seen an alarming increase in the number of cases there, with 523 confirmed in the previous 24 hours. That is why it is so important that the E3 supports Iran in the way that it is.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-03-02-lords.u181	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-03-02	Sugg, Elizabeth	Support for detained British-Iranians	2020-03-02 00:00:00	2020-03-02 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords	My Lords, may I say this in introduction? From today, our virtual proceedings will be streamed live on parliamentlive.tv. It is important that the work of holding the Government to account continues, and it is right that those outside the House are able to follow our work. An enormous amount of work has gone into the building of this new virtual House, and it means that the important work of the House can continue. It has also brought about another important change. Before the spread of the coronavirus, average daily attendance in the Chamber was approximately 450; in line with the clear public health advice, last Wednesday only 19 Members attended in person. I place on record my sincere thanks to all the staff of the House and the digital service who have worked to make this possible, and my gratitude to Members for working from home Virtual proceedings in the House will now begin. I remind Members that these proceedings are subject to parliamentary privilege, and what we say is available to the public in Hansard and to those listening, and now watching. I remind participating Members that their microphones will be set to mute and that they should unmute their microphones shortly before we reach their place in the speakers’ list. Members are asked not to use the group chat function The virtual proceedings on Oral Questions will now commence. I will call each Oral Question in the normal way. I will then call on the Minister to make the initial response. I will then call the Peer who asked the original Question to ask their supplementary question, in the usual way. The Minister will again respond, and I will then call, in turn, noble Lords asking supplementary questions, as listed on the speakers’ list Please ensure that questions and answers are short, and I apologise in advance if it is not possible to ensure that everyone gets in to ask their question. I ask each speaker to ensure that their microphone is unmuted prior to asking a supplementary question. Each speaker’s microphone will be returned to mute once their supplementary question has finished. In accordance with the guidance agreed by the Procedure Committee, if Members are not listed it is not possible for them to ask a supplementary question or to take part in proceedings. I call the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, to ask the first Oral Question.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-04-28-lords.u1	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-04-28	Fowler, Peter	House begins virtual proceedings today	2020-04-28 00:00:00	2020-04-28 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	I	Independent	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-26-commons	Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is an honour to have the opportunity to make my maiden speech in this debate on the Environment Bill, which will have far-reaching implications for our economy and our society, heralding a cleaner, greener nation There is only one place to begin my remarks today, and that is in paying tribute to my predecessor, Sir David Lidington. David was the Member of Parliament for Aylesbury for fully 27 years. He held senior ministerial roles, culminating as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister of State for the Cabinet Office during some particularly testing times for the last Government. Whenever I mention David, the response is the same—that he is a man who is decent, dedicated and thoughtful, a gentleman and the epitome of the public servant. When a new colleague was talking to me about David recently, he had just one question, “Do you have an equally big brain? ” My answer was simple—“No. ” After all, David led his Cambridge college to victory on “University Challenge”, not once but twice, whereas the only TV quiz show I competed on twice was “Blankety Blank”.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-26-commons.u297	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-26	Butler, Robert	Tribute to predecessor Sir David	2020-02-26 00:00:00	2020-02-26 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons	The hon. Lady is correct; on 11 December, Post Office Ltd reached a settlement in the group litigation claim brought by 555 postmasters or former postmasters. This has culminated in a successful mediation, and a settlement of £57.7 million was reached, funded by the Post Office. The Government welcome the agreement by the parties to settle this long-running litigation. It is true to say that many have suffered through litigation, and Post Office Ltd has apologised for that. One key point is that this mediation occurred under the new chief executive officer, who is making sure that the recommendations made by the judge, and culture change and changes within the Post Office, happen.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-21-commons.u116	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-21	Tolhurst, Kelly Jane	Post Office litigation settlement reached	2020-01-21 00:00:00	2020-01-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons	No. If anything, I think that my legacy will be as the Minister who signed the legislation ensuring that we were the first country to achieve net zero by 2050 I also hope that our legacy will be a successful partnership bid with the Italians for COP26. The Italian ambassador came to meet Members of Parliament here yesterday. I did not see the hon. Gentleman there, but never mind about that—[Interruption. ] He might not recognise that we had the Italian ambassador here to cover our COP26 bid, but he would have been welcome. An email was sent to him, inviting him to attend, but unfortunately he did not turn up. Our commitment must be UK-wide and we are making UK-wide schemes available, including recently ensuring that we can subsidise energy supplies for the north of Scotland, which demonstrates the benefits of the Union in delivering net zero.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons.u32	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-16	Skidmore, Christopher James	Net zero, COP26, UK unity	2019-07-16 00:00:00	2019-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-commons	I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial interests. I am very supportive of these measures. One of the risks to the housing market is the withdrawal by the lenders of high loan-to-value mortgages, especially for first-time buyers. We know that 90% and 95% loans can become a self-fulfilling prophecy that damages the market. Will the Minister do whatever he can to make sure that our banks support high loan-to-value mortgages throughout this time?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-13-commons.u305	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-13	Hollinrake, Kevin Paul	Support high loan-to-value mortgages	2020-07-13 00:00:00	2020-07-13 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons	Many questions this afternoon seem designed to construct negotiating hurdles that are impossible for the Prime Minister, or any Government, to jump over. I have met lots of constituents in Gloucester over the last three days who want to see this issue resolved as sensibly and quickly as possible. Can I therefore give my hon. Friend the Minister all encouragement for the Prime Minister to come back with legally binding changes that will make a huge difference, particularly to the Northern Ireland situation, and then for this House, 80% of whom were elected on manifestos to respect the referendum, to get behind the deal and see it through?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-11-commons.u221	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-11	Graham, Richard Michael John Ogilvie	Support for Prime Minister's deal	2019-03-11 00:00:00	2019-03-11 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons	I beg to move, That this House— (1) approves the First Report of the Committee on Standards, Keith Vaz, HC 93; (2) endorses the recommendations in paragraphs 99 and 101; and (3) accordingly suspends Keith Vaz from the service of the House for a period of 6 months Today’s motion follows the publication of the first report of the Committee on Standards of this Session on the conduct of the right hon. Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz). I have been asked to say that he cannot be here today to listen to this because he is currently in hospital. The report was agreed by the Standards Committee following a process of investigation and consideration by recognised due process, and it was published on Monday 28 October. The Government have sought to schedule a debate as quickly as possible, as is the usual practice It is always regrettable when a motion such as this is before the House. The matter before us today has been investigated by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, and it has now been reported on by the Committee on Standards. I thank the former commissioner, Kathryn Hudson, and the current commissioner, Kathryn Stone, for their work. I also thank the hon. Member for Stretford and Urmston (Kate Green), the Chairman of the Committee on Standards, and the other members of the Committee for their work in producing this report The motion approves the report of the Committee on Standards, endorses the recommendation of the Committee and proposes that the right hon. Member for Leicester East be suspended from the service of the House for a period of six months. I commend this motion to the House.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-31-commons.u287	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-31	Rees-Mogg, Jacob William	Suspend Keith Vaz six months	2019-10-31 00:00:00	2019-10-31 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons	In my local borough of Sutton, the council has received a damning Ofsted report on its services for children with special educational needs, and parents have formed a crisis education, health and care plan group. Does my hon. Friend agree that councils should work with their local NHS trusts to ensure that there is early diagnosis and that problems do not develop into something far worse?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-27-commons.u420	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-27	Colburn, Elliot	Sutton council special needs issues	2020-01-27 00:00:00	2020-01-27 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-commons	I fully understand the lure of the precautionary principle, given the dreadful scenarios that the Government are facing, with increasing cases and projections. I understand the lure of saying, “Let’s do this, just in case; let’s take no chances. ” I certainly do not envy the Prime Minister or any member of the quad their decisions. However, I have a number of concerns that simply cannot be overcome Let us cast our minds forward to 2 December, because I feel that we will be in this situation again. What will “Good enough that we can unwind” look like? It took three and a half months last time for us to have a haircut or our first pint in a pub. What level of daily infections or hospitalisations will be deemed good enough to unwind It is a mistake for the Government not to consider what those figures might be, because they would at least give the public something to aim for and look forward to, but we have no data and no concept of what that is likely to be. We are told that this is the last bridge before the cavalry come over the hill and that we have better treatments. We are told that we will have the vaccine that we are all looking for, but we do not know when it will be ready, how effective it will be or the timeframe over which it will be rolled out across the population. Let us not forget that HIV has been with us for 40 years, and we still do not have a vaccine There are so many clear nonsenses in the regulations. I and many others in the House, I am sure, are getting emails from gym owners and users, people who enjoy outdoor archery and those concerned about the golf situation, and a lot from churchgoers. How can it be sensible that a couple are allowed to go for a walk on the course of the golf club that they belong to, but they face a fine if they dare do it with a golf club and a ball?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-04-commons.u197	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-04	Mackinlay, Craig	Critics government pandemic handling criteria	2020-11-04 00:00:00	2020-11-04 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons	I do not know whether I should start by declaring an interest in that I am a Christian who has newly found faith, but it is really exciting to see so many Members of all parties in this House wanting to take part in this debate. It is a shame that we are limited to such a short time today, because there are so many MPs who want to get in and make their points First, I want to pay tribute to the Foreign Secretary for his work in bringing about this important report. There was that old adage in No. 10 Downing Street that “We don’t do God”, but that was in a previous Administration. Christians in this country have often thought that there was a sniffiness about Christianity. All too often since I have found faith, I have heard the words “Oh, they’re do-gooders”, and a Church of England vicar sent me an email about “Jesus freaks”. We seem to do down Christianity in this country somewhat, and it is important that the Foreign Secretary has put this front and centre of the work of the Foreign Office We are a multicultural and multi-faith society, and we should embrace and champion that, but when we see that 80% of all religious persecutions around the world are persecutions of Christians, it is important that we as a nation stand up and say that we will not accept this and are going to come to the aid of those Christians around the world. In the same way that we deplore it and speak out when the Rohingya are persecuted in Myanmar, the Yazidis in Iraq and the Uyghur Muslims in China, so we must, with all our might and all our voice, speak out in defence of Christians around the world It touched me recently when, at the church that I attend in Uttoxeter—the Renew Church—we had Open Doors come and present to us one Sunday. The scale at which Christian persecution around the world is taking place is scary, as is the speed at which it is increasing.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-18-commons.u377	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-18	Griffiths, Andrew James	Defending Christians against global persecution	2019-07-18 00:00:00	2019-07-18 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-commons	The hon. Gentleman is right that part of building back better is about building back greener. In several of the sectors where we have been encouraging ways to get involved in kickstart as well as apprenticeships, it will be about that green recovery. As I said earlier, it is not that we can create in every individual job. That is why we are working with organisations and businesses to try to do that. I believe that this boost of paying wages for 25 hours a week for a young person who is bursting with potential and wanting to get into the world of work will be a boost to those companies in and around his constituency who want to have that green recovery.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-03-commons.u171	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-03	Coffey, Thérèse Anne	Green recovery through jobs and apprenticeships	2020-09-03 00:00:00	2020-09-03 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords	My Lords, I declare my farming interests as set out in the register. Food supply and food security are of the greatest importance at all times; in the context of this current unprecedented challenge, they are extremely critical. I am therefore extremely grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Boycott, for securing this debate. As the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe, said, it will not be possible for me to address now all the points that noble Lords have made during this thought-provoking three-hour debate. I shall of course pick up on all the points that have been made and reply fully I join noble Lords, in particular my noble friends Lady Altmann and Lord Holmes of Richmond, in paying tribute to all those across the food industry for their momentous efforts to help feed the nation. They are providing a vital service and the response has been remarkable. They have been working hard to keep food flowing into stores and people’s houses. We can be enormously proud of, and grateful to, all those businesses, large and small, and their employees, who have stepped up to create innovative solutions to ensure that people have the food they need. I am particularly grateful to the noble Baronesses, Lady Mallalieu and Lady Randerson, for raising small shops, and indeed to the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville, for mentioning delivery services from not only shops but pubs and takeaways, which many of us have witnessed. I am also most grateful to my noble friend Lord Lucas for recognising the work that civil servants and officials have undertaken, and for emphasising the importance of the experience they bring This has been a very difficult time for many, particularly vulnerable people. The Government have been working extremely closely with industry and across civic society. Industry has adapted quickly to changes in demand. Food supply into and across the United Kingdom remains resilient, and the general supply situation for most goods is returning to normal The Government have worked quickly to introduce new measures to make sure that businesses can continue to keep food supply flowing. These measures include extending delivery hours to supermarkets and flexing rules on drivers’ hours to allow a higher frequency of deliveries to stores. We have temporarily relaxed elements of competition law, allowing retailers to co-operate in the national interest to keep shops stocked. We have also designated employees involved in food production as key workers. These interventions give the sector the flexibility it needs to ensure that food reaches people in a rapidly changing situation. On competition law, I say to the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, that the CMA has created a dedicated Covid-19 task force to identify any of the sorts of issues he mentioned. I would be happy to pass on any particular points for him The noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Whitchurch, and many other noble Lords raised the issue of the crisis falling hardest on certain parts of society. I want to emphasise this because I have witnessed it: the Government are working extremely hard with others to ensure that everyone can safely access nutritious food. With reference to the economically vulnerable, on 8 May we announced £16 million of funding from DCMS to ensure that food is available to critical front-line services supporting vulnerable people. This includes a food charity grant scheme to provide food to some of the most economically vulnerable people. Applicants must confirm they will aim to use food funded under this grant to provide or contribute towards—I emphasise—nutritionally balanced meals in alignment with the Eatwell Guide. We work with FareShare, WRAP, other charitable organisations, DWP and MHCLG to help at least 5,000 front-line charities—a point that the noble Baronesses, Lady Janke and Lady Tyler, made I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville, that schools can make food parcel or gift voucher arrangements with any local or national supplier that they consider appropriate. I will take back the points that have been made so that I can have a discussion with the Department for Education To address the needs of clinically and economically vulnerable people who do not have a wider support network to help them secure food or who are unable physically to go to supermarkets, we have developed a shielding scheme. We have so far identified more than 2 million clinically extremely vulnerable people in England. Where they do not have a support network, we are ensuring an uninterrupted supply of food. Wherever shielding individuals let the Government know that they are having trouble accessing food, their details are passed on to supermarkets, which put them at the front of the queue for online delivery slots. We are arranging for them to receive packages of essential supplies delivered directly to their doorstep. They are designed to deliver the nutritional requirements—I emphasise this issue as the noble Baronesses, Lady Boycott and Lady Bakewell, raised it—of one person for one week and have been reviewed by nutritionists. To date, more than 1 million food parcels have been delivered in England. It is the biggest effort to deliver supplies to those in need since the Second World War. I am grateful for what my noble friend Lady Altmann said in this regard The noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, raised this point, and I want to emphasise that we are working to support others who need help with food supplies, including the elderly, the disabled, blind people, people self-isolating, people with pre-existing health conditions following enhanced self-distancing and people who normally rely on food deliveries by supermarkets or support networks. I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell, that we are working closely with local authorities, businesses and charities to help this group access food through food deliveries from local retailers, wholesalers and food businesses. We have also worked with supermarkets to increase access to priority delivery for click-and-collect slots. This group can also refer themselves or a family member to NHS Volunteer Responders. I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the almost 600,000 people who have come forward and are working on shopping for food and essential supplies on behalf of vulnerable people The noble Lord, Lord Alton, and the noble Baronesses, Lady Scott of Needham Market and Lady Jones of Whitchurch, referred to food waste. There is much on this that I would wish to discuss, but we should record that during this time WRAP has said that food waste has been reduced by nearly one-third. That is a lesson to be learned. I also endorse what my noble friend Lord Caithness said about hard-working farmers—I want to mention the fishing industry here, too—who maintain the supply of products which form an essential part of many household diets. My noble friend Lord Shewsbury mentioned eggs. I say to him, and I will take this back, that it is a requirement to include the country of origin and farming requirements on eggs. We welcome all parts of the food chain when they promote and source British products. I am aware of WTO matters but I am happy to say to your Lordships, and more widely, that I always seek to buy British and will always encourage others to buy British food and drink. My noble friend Lady Redfern was joined by my noble friend Lord Taylor of Holbeach in championing not only Lincolnshire but food production at home The noble Baroness, Lady Watkins, raised the new fund to help support those dairy farmers who have seen decreased demand due to the loss of market in the food service sector. The new fund will provide support for those most in need. Eligible dairy farmers in England who have lost more than 25% of their income over April and May will be entitled to up to £10,000 each, to cover 70% of their lost income during those months. I will take back the points about any further months thereafter I am pleased that the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Whitchurch, and my noble friend Lord Blencathra raised fishing. A £10 million support package for England’s fishing and aquaculture sectors was announced on 17 April to secure the sustainability of the English fishing industry. It is also important to say that Defra and Seafish are working closely on the “Sea For Yourself” campaign to promote seafood species caught in UK waters. I emphasise to my noble friend Lord Blencathra, and reaffirm, our intention to be an independent coastal state with all that that commands. Other support includes the business interruption loans and temporary competition law exemption, allowing the dairy industry to share information and work together My noble friend Lady McIntosh has been a champion of our farmers and producers and we ourselves continue to champion them. We are supporting them to grow more great British food and to provide a reliable, sustainable and nutritious food supply to the British public The noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, raised the importance of improving the productivity of agricultural and horticultural activity. The Agriculture Bill will allow us to provide financial assistance in these matters. This includes support to increase the productivity of fruit and vegetables On a point raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, we want the entire supply chain to help deliver healthier food and encourage healthy eating. This point was also made by the noble Lord, Lord Patel. Our National Food Strategy will build on the Agriculture Bill to help ensure that our food system delivers healthy and affordable food for all, built on a resilient and sustainable agriculture sector. This point was raised by the noble Baronesses, Lady Bakewell and Lady Jones of Whitchurch, and my noble friend Lord Caithness. We will also ensure that the Bill sets out our plans to reward farmers for, among other things, safeguarding the nation’s high welfare standards I say to my noble friend the Duke of Wellington and the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Whitchurch, that we are leading on different initiatives to promote British produce. This includes Defra’s “Food is GREAT” campaign, while the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board recently launched a new marketing campaign to increase supplies of milk, funded jointly with Defra, the devolved Administrations and Dairy UK. We also have campaigns under way to promote beef and pork, with a further campaign on lamb to come I endorse my noble friend Lord Blencathra’s words on the importance of innovation. On another point raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, and the noble Lord, Lord Patel, anyone going to Harper Adams will see the extraordinary work going on there, for instance. Since 2013, the Government have funded an agri-tech strategy with £160 million and the recent industrial strategy challenge fund with £90 million, transforming food production. Defra is now developing an ambitious industry-driven R&D package My noble friend Lord Taylor of Holbeach, the noble Lord, Lord Cameron of Dillington, and the noble Baroness, Lady Young of Old Scone, raised a really important point. Farming, the environment and rural resilience are a complete jigsaw puzzle. It is not about separate silos; all of it is absolutely intrinsic—another point that my noble friend Lord Lucas raised Seasonal labour was raised by many noble Lords, including my noble friend Lord Naseby. Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, also mentioned prisoners: Defra is working with the MoJ on the temporary release licence scheme for agricultural work. I am most grateful to the noble Lord for raising that. It was also raised by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans, the noble Baronesses, Lady Quin, Lady Parminter and Lady Sheehan, and many other noble Lords There has been a strong response from thousands of British people expressing their interest in agricultural work in the coming months. Work is currently in hand on the government/industry digital hub “Pick for Britain”. We think that, for some of the early weeks, labour has been covered, but we are conscious that from the end of this month and beyond we need ever more people to come forward. We are working on the promotion of the website. I say to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope of Craighead, that there will be students. My noble friend Lord Duncan of Springbank and the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, know very well that this is hard work and we are very conscious that we will need to encourage British people to come forward. That is what we intend to do and we very much hope that those who are able to come from overseas can do so as well On the issue of self-sufficiency, obviously self-sufficiency does not equate to overall food security, however important increasing British production is. My noble friend Lady Verma and the noble Lord, Lord McConnell, referred to communities across the world—many vulnerable communities—where we will want to import from, and sustainably. We continue to monitor closely the impacts of the outbreak on international supply chains, including any disruption to freight transport, borders, production and trade. At present, all short-term risks have stabilised and we have a free flow of goods along the international supply chain. We will continue to co-operate with international partners to ensure that the UK continues to receive vital supplies of food and other critical goods. We are working with the Department for International Trade and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to ensure that we maintain close ties internationally and monitor any risks that may arise. I believe that we will have a very close relationship with our EU friends and partners. This is work in progress and I am confident that there will be a successful result The noble Lord, Lord Mountevans, raised shipping, as did the noble Baronesses, Lady Randerson and Lady Ritchie. On 24 April, the Government announced a financial package to keep freight flowing on routes into and across the four nations of the United Kingdom. I am conscious of the importance of food flowing into Northern Ireland—the noble Lord, Lord Empey, raised this. Although routes are currently running without significant disruption, the package is designed to help avoid future disruption or delays. In the interest of time, I will, in my letter, write in full on the situation of Northern Ireland, because I think it is absolutely critical. We wish and intend to have no difficulties in our trading arrangements across the United Kingdom. Indeed, we want to have very good trading relationships with the EU and across the world as well. As my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot—I think—and the noble Lord, Lord Empey, and others raised, there are undoubtedly going to be lessons from this crisis and for the longer term as well We have included in the Agriculture Bill a new requirement for the United Kingdom Government to report on food security to Parliament at least once every five years. The report will analyse a wide range of data and will contain information on food supply, including the role of strong domestic production alongside diverse sources of supply. It will cover a range of issues, including global food availability, supply sources for food, the resilience of the supply chain, household expenditure on food, food safety and consumer confidence. The five-year frequency was set because we need to allow sufficient time to observe key trends, but I emphasise that these matters are under constant consideration Our engagement with businesses and representative bodies in the food sector has been extensive; I have seen that for myself. Food businesses have responded swiftly and responsibly to ensure the supply of food and have worked with us to make sure that those most in need have continued access to food Throughout, we have wanted to highlight the crucial role the food and farming sectors have played, now more than ever. While we remain confident in our supply chain, we must not be complacent and will continue to work with industry to ensure that there is food—and great British food—on our shelves and in our kitchens I thank the noble Baroness and all noble Lords, particularly those I have not been in a position to mention. I am very conscious of all that has been said and am taking back all the comments made. I will write fully and am very grateful for this debate. As I said at the beginning, it has been extremely thought-provoking —not only about the current crisis but most definitely for the longer term.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-14-lords.u168	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-14	Gardiner, John Eric	Food supply crisis prioritization	2020-05-14 00:00:00	2020-05-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons	The Secretary of State has still given no reason. Why take the provision out of the 2018 Act? It is in previous legislation. There are loads of things in legislation through the decades that the Government say they disagree with, but amendments are not needed because they have said they disagree, and they do not remove those things from the statute book. That is what makes us suspect that he wants to remove it, because for some reason he thinks that it will restrict what he wants to do, and in the end, therefore, he will betray the commitments that have been made to the most vulnerable children. If not, he should keep the provision in the Act.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-22-commons.u213	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-22	Cooper, Yvette	Oppose removal from 2018 Act	2020-01-22 00:00:00	2020-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-lords	My Lords, this has been a serious but, in many ways, profoundly depressing debate—secured and introduced so ably by the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, whom so many of us have thanked not only for this debate and his contribution to it but for his consistent campaigning on these issues over many years This year’s reports of the Chief Inspectors of Prisons and Probation are as depressing as any. Peter Clarke reports on prisons: “Far too many of our jails have been plagued by drugs, violence, appalling living conditions and a lack of access to meaningful rehabilitative activity” On self-harm, he reports: “Overall, levels of self‑harm were disturbingly high and self-inflicted deaths tragically increased by nearly one-fifth on the previous year” On prison conditions, he reports: “As we have said in the past on many occasions, broken windows, unscreened lavatories … vermin and filth should not feature in 21st century jails” On rehabilitation, he reports: “In only a third of the adult male prisons that we inspected was purposeful activity, which includes … education, work and training, judged to be good or reasonably good” Discouragingly, he also reported a poor response to his recommendations, with the level of those achieved falling below those not achieved for each of the last three years In her annual report on the probation service in March, Dame Glenys Stacey described the provision of probation by the community rehabilitation companies as “sub-standard, and … demonstrably poor”. She described a, “deplorable diminution of the probation profession and a widespread move away from good probation practice” She said the model was “irredeemably flawed”. As pointed out by the noble Lord, Lord Beecham, the model has been largely abandoned, but without an effective substitute in place The first challenge is to cut prison numbers. As is well known, we imprison more of our population than any other country in western Europe, a point made by the noble Lord, Lord Jay, and just reinforced by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf. We also have very high reoffending rates following prison sentences. That is particularly true of short sentences. The reoffending rate for sentences of 12 months or less has climbed to 64% On IPP sentences, we fully support the call of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood—and before him we remember Lord Lloyd of Berwick—to end the continuing injustice to IPP prisoners who have served well beyond their tariffs and to reverse the burden of proof that they currently have to discharge to secure their release We have opposed proposals, now enacted, for mandatory custodial sentences for the possession of knives and corrosive substances. Unlike the Government, we trust the judges, so judges must have discretion in sentencing, particularly for young people. We cannot cut prison numbers without putting an end to sentence inflation, legislative or otherwise, which costs large sums of money, as my noble friend Lord Beith and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Phillips, have said. On all the evidence, sentence inflation gives a nil return in reducing reoffending We were achieving some cut-through in this area before Mr Johnson’s election as Prime Minister. The Government were starting to listen to the evidence on prison numbers as well as on rehabilitation, prison conditions and the failure of the probation services. But back then we had David Lidington and then David Gauke as Justice Secretary and Rory Stewart as Prisons Minister, and we know what happened to them This Prime Minister says he will build more prisons and lock more people up and for longer, pressing for longer sentences and cutting early release, as the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, described and, rightly, decried. The Prime Minister’s response is a populist one for his party conference and the Daily Mail but it completely ignores the evidence. His plans would increase crime, not reduce it We are rightly ashamed of the degrading conditions of our prisons, well described by the noble Lord, Lord Judd: overcrowded and still understaffed, pervaded by extreme violence and widespread drug abuse, with inadequate care for mental health and drug addiction issues and limited training and purposeful activity. Prisoners, including women and young offenders, spend far too long locked in their cells—often as much as 22 hours a day, as the noble Baroness, Lady Masham, mentioned—with no regard for their well-being. It is a system where prisoners are discharged with £46, often on a Friday and often miles from home with no accommodation, services or source of help, and a system where the absurd denial of access to any form of IT prevents them applying for universal credit before release and pursuing training courses or seeking housing or employment online. In our community sentences, as Dame Glenys pointed out, the Government have negligently allowed probation services to collapse, with CRCs’ contracts terminated early but with no realistic plan to overhaul an underresourced and dysfunctional system, as my noble friend Lord Beith said My noble friend Lord German, who sadly cannot be here, and I, ably assisted by many, including my noble friend Lady Burt, after taking extensive evidence, including from some who have spoken today, have produced a paper on rehabilitation called Turning Lives Around, which became party policy at our conference. On cutting prison numbers, we propose a presumption against sentences of 12 months or less, replacing them with effective and tough but sympathetic community sentences. I regret that I am unable to agree with the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, that indeterminate detention holds a solution. The solution lies in working community sentences that incorporate the rehabilitative help that he talked about More generally, we propose a co-ordinated approach to arranging for prison and probation, as well as all the other services that offenders need if they are to escape from a cycle of repeated criminal behaviour. These include health—particularly mental health, as discussed by the noble Lord, Lord Bichard—and welfare services; treatment for drug abuse and addiction; the provision of housing, training and employment; and involving the voluntary sector and private and public sector employers. My noble friend Lord Dholakia dwelled on the important contribution that the voluntary sector is keen to make but which has been underutilised to date Local co-ordinating bodies would be established, funded by the Ministry of Justice but administered locally, working from existing offices with small staffs, with a brief to consider the needs of each offender individually and commission all the services they need while in custody, in preparation for release, on release from custody and in the course of community sentences. The phrase “assertive outreach” used by the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, describes well what is needed. Our reforms would help people leaving custody who are currently at high risk of returning to prison We address the particular needs of women in the criminal justice system, which are often increased by past trauma, as pointed out by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Gloucester and the noble Lord, Lord Farmer, in line with the 2007 report of the noble Baroness, Lady Corston, as recognised in the female offender strategy and discussed by the noble Baronesses, Lady Armstrong and Lady Healy, and my noble friend Lady Burt. We also address the needs of young offenders, seeking full implementation of the recommendations made in the 2016 review by Charlie Taylor, who gave us impressive evidence and now heads up the Youth Justice Board, following my noble friend Lord McNally, whose understanding, gleaned during his successful and important work to help young offenders, shone through his speech today We need a fresh approach to penal policy. We must shrink prison numbers and humanise our prisons. We must concentrate on providing all the services that offenders need to support them in their rehabilitation in a comprehensive and co-ordinated way during custodial sentences, on release from custody and throughout well-resourced and carefully implemented effective community sentences.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-03-lords.u109	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-10-03	Marks, Jonathan	Prison problems demand comprehensive reforms	2019-10-03 00:00:00	2019-10-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords	My Lords, as before, I declare my agricultural interests as detailed in the register. During the many days of this Committee a considerable number of thoughtful and constructive amendments have been tabled, but in most cases the Government have suggested that they are unnecessary since the matter is already covered in Clause 1 or can be provided for in the new environmental land management scheme. However, the ELMS will not begin until 2024. During the years between now and then, many farms that are currently barely profitable will suffer or disappear I will speak to my Amendment 149. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, for signing it as well. As I said at Second Reading, my real concern is for the very survival of smaller hill farms during the intervening years from now until the new ELM payments begin in 2024. The Government announced in February that farmers in the lowest band of basic direct payments—up to £30,000 per annum—would have their payment cut by 5% in 2021, with further cuts in the following years. However, the Government’s own figures for 2018-19—the latest available—show that the average cattle and sheep farmer in a less-favoured area received a direct basic payment of £24,000 and still made a profit of only £15,500. Figures for 2019-20, when available, will probably show a slightly better position. Nevertheless, these smaller hill farms are only marginally profitable even with the basic payment and would be commercially totally unviable without taxpayer support We all accept that we are moving away from the basic payment system to the new environmental land management scheme payments. The purpose of my amendment is to ask the Government to think again about whether it is sensible or fair to reduce those in the lowest band even by 5% before ELMS payments kick in in 2024 On Tuesday two weeks ago we debated Amendment 78 in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Bruce and Lord Greaves. Their amendment urged the Government to maintain support for hill farms and other marginal land. I support this general principle. My amendment is more specific and asks the Government simply to protect just the lowest band of recipients from the cuts until the new payment systems come into play Last Thursday, the noble Baroness, Lady Bloomfield, stated that since small abattoirs operate on a commercial basis they would not fit into the principle of the public good. My contention is that, unfortunately, small hill farms are not in any way commercial on their own, so I believe the public will consider it more than just for taxpayers’ money to be given for the public good of maintaining our small hill farms, which play such an important part in so many rural communities in this country. When the Minister responds to this group of amendments, I hope he will give the Committee an assurance that the Government will look again at the timing and percentage of the reductions in the basic payments for small farmers in the uplands.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords.u115	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-21	Wellesley, Arthur	Urges delaying payment cuts to farmers	2020-07-21 00:00:00	2020-07-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON;NA	Conservative;Non-affiliated	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-23-lords	My Lords, this is a very wide-ranging set of amendments. I feel slightly sorry for the noble Baroness, Lady Worthington, because I thought her amendment was a good one with good points, but it seems to have been rather left behind by the debate If we are to keep up standards in agriculture, there will be costs, which the consumer will ultimately have to bear. If we do anything to undermine that, products simply will not be purchased in sufficiently high numbers for many of our producers to carry on I am not just repeating the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, in parrot-fashion: this is exactly what happened in the past. If your production levels are left behind and your prices are too high, people buy something else. It was called the great agricultural depression when the steam ship and a free market policy opened up the prairie and the pampas to production. Look it up: most British farmland was rough grazing So it is clear that, if we need to keep people in production, and to keep that production going, we need to maintain standards. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, said in conversation to me that everything has been too reasonable. Well, I give her all the encouragement to be as unreasonable as she likes on this one. I hope that the Minister will take away the need for it by agreeing to make sure that standards are kept. If they are not, I am afraid that we are going to have to readdress this issue at every available opportunity.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-23-lords.u240	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-23	Hubbard, Dominic	Support agricultural standards retention	2020-07-23 00:00:00	2020-07-23 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-04-lords	My Lords, perhaps the easiest thing is to read out the Prime Minister’s text, in reply to a question precisely on non-regression: “The crucial thing that will reassure her is that in the event of the EU bringing forward new legislation, we in this Government will bring forward an amendable motion so that the House may choose to match those standards”. —[Official Report, Commons, 22/10/19; col. 831. ] We are very clear. We are in the market not of non-regression but of moving forward. We need to enhance the environment. That is the predication of the OEP and the work of the Environment Bill whenever it comes forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-11-04-lords.u7	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-11-04	Gardiner, John Eric	Forward environmental progress	2019-11-04 00:00:00	2019-11-04 00:00:00	Upper house	57	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords	I thank the Minister for her Answer. As Carers Week draws to a close, I point out that we owe a great debt of gratitude to the 6.5 million carers in the country who save us more than £100 billion a year, given the costs that we would otherwise have to bear. The problem is that nearly three-quarters of those carers say that they suffer mental health stress as a result of their caring duties, and over 60% say that they have physical health problems. Will the overdue Green Paper on social care put sustainable funding in place to properly provide support for carers and ensure speedy access to health services for them?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-13-lords.u42	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-13	Brinton, Sarah Virginia	Support carers with sustainable funding	2019-06-13 00:00:00	2019-06-13 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LD	Liberal Democrat	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-lords	My Lords, grants will be available from 1 November, will be administered by local authorities and will remain in place until April 2021, with a review point in January. The funding will apply only to England and, if applied across the country, would provide over £250 million of support each month.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-22-lords.u145	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-22	Bethell, James	Grant funding for England	2020-10-22 00:00:00	2020-10-22 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons	Skills for adults and young people in rural areas, such as West Dorset, are absolutely invaluable. Towns and cities are an important part of supporting the future economy, and we are working with education colleagues to consider how Government support on skills will be an integral part of our strategy for growth.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-10-commons.u29	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-10	Solloway, Amanda Jane	Developing rural skills for growth	2020-11-10 00:00:00	2020-11-10 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons	It is a privilege to follow the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips) and my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart). I was not going to mention this, but it now seems appropriate: my mother, Sheila Lillian Harman Kerr, passed away on Thursday evening. She was a daughter of Birmingham, so I have a bit of Brum inside me. Members may not be able to discern it from my accent, but a bit of Birmingham lingers in my heart. I feel she might be smiling at the fact that I am following such an excellent Member of Parliament for Birmingham and someone who represents someone who was a servant of the city of Birmingham I rise to support the Second Reading of this Bill on a key matter relating to our departure from the European Union: control over our borders. I thank Ministers for their decision to scrap the charges for the settled status process for EU citizens. In particular, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Huw Merriman) for the very significant part he played in bringing that about. I know how much that means to people in my constituency. It is very important that our actions in government match our words. We must send a clear message to our family members, friends, neighbours and colleagues who have come to this country from the European Union, and to whom this country is now home, that they are a vital part our community. They enrich our lives and play a hugely valuable part in our economy, and I deeply regret any suggestion from any source to the contrary. Members of this House owe it to their constituents and the reputation of this House to measure the way they express themselves about such matters, and in interventions they make in debates about our departure from the European Union I have several points to make about the Bill. The first is about the university sector, and the University of Stirling in particular. In a report for Destination for Education, KPMG calculated that every international student recruited to a British university brings a net positive economic contribution of £95,000 in total. For the academic year 2015-16, that was estimated to be worth £20.3 billion. We are talking about a major British exporting success. I am proud of the UK university sector’s global standing, and I am proud that the University of Stirling is consistently highly rated as a destination of choice for international students. Stirling loves its international students and welcomes them with open arms Our world-class university system is the envy of the world and an unrivalled source of soft power influence in the world. I do not believe that student visas should be subject to any kind of cap, and I was encouraged by the Home Secretary’s remarks on that matter. We are competing with other English-speaking countries. By making it more difficult to access British universities than those of our competitors, we are doing ourselves no favours. We are in danger of losing market share in a growing global market. International students applying for bona fide courses at bona fide institutions should be allowed to come here. After all, they will support themselves We need a visa system that reflects an unabashed bias towards attracting and retaining talent, including newly qualified international graduates and postgraduates from UK universities. Why on earth would we not want such talent to stay in the United Kingdom to the benefit of our economy and the public good? As with other issues that we examine in this House, we must look for the balance of fairness. It is not fair or right to expect an international worker, graduate or postgraduate to earn more than £30,000 per annum, and to say that they qualify as skilled labour only on that basis. That would be a terrible mistake. The average graduate salary in Scotland is in the region of £21,000. Instead of rigidly fixing the system to a formula based on notional taxation contributions, we should look at earnings potential and social contribution We must be fair to businesses of all sizes. I ask hon. Members to consider how difficult it is for a small business to sponsor an international worker for employment in the United Kingdom. I worked for a global businesses before coming to this House, but what works for a big business does not necessarily work for a small business. The test of what is good for our economy is not how a global corporation copes with an imposed process, but how it works for a small business with limited resources I say this to the Government: beware of a one-size-fits-all approach to skilled labour. I would have thought that it is stating the obvious to say that what works in London and the south-east will not be right for other parts of the United Kingdom, so we must build flexibility into whatever policy we apply. The variables must be weighted to ensure that skilled labour can be attracted and retained in all parts of the United Kingdom and all scales of business.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-28-commons.u489	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-28	Kerr, Stephen Charles	UK university support EU citizens	2019-01-28 00:00:00	2019-01-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	I entirely understand why the hon. Gentleman raises that issue. I reassure him that we support freedom of all religious belief; it is just that we think that Christianity has been slightly left behind for various reasons. More Christians are persecuted than those of any other faith, so we want to ensure that we are giving that the proper attention it deserves without excluding any other faith from our concerns.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u405	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Hunt, Jeremy Richard Streynsham	Support for Christian persecution attention	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-14-lords	My Lords, I too welcome this Bill and congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, for bringing it back to the House. I welcome the Bill because, if enacted, it should certainly improve access to palliative care for dying people. However, as has been said, the Bill does not include some of the provisions contained in earlier versions of the Bill as introduced in 2015 and 2016. The noble Baroness has acknowledged this and says that it is in the interests of getting a shorter Bill. However, if the Bill is to ensure the highest standards of care for those who need palliative care, these provisions need to be recognised in some form, whether in the Bill itself or, as the noble Baroness has suggested, in a code of practice The first of these provisions relates to supporting individual care preferences. Like the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, I am disappointed that this latest version of the Bill does not include a duty on clinical commissioning groups to provide patients with support to meet their preferences in care, or support on advance decisions to refuse treatment under Section 24 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, both of which I was very pleased to see in Clause 1 of the 2016 Bill. I believe these provisions should be embraced in any palliative care framework, for three reasons First, there is clear evidence that documenting care preferences through the process of advance care planning increases use of hospice and palliative care and prevents emergency hospitalisation towards the end of life. It increases patient and family satisfaction and reduces stress, anxiety and depression in surviving relatives. The importance of clearly documenting care preferences was highlighted in the recent case of an unidentified clinical commissioning group against P. In this case, a nursing home did not agree with the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration for religious reasons. The patient’s family had to go to court to have their loved one’s previously stated wishes respected. Documented care preferences—that is to say, putting advance decisions to refuse treatment in writing—would have avoided this tragic and stressful situation, as the patient’s wishes could have been honoured without her family having to go to court Secondly, we talk about personalised end-of-life care in the ambitions framework and in the NHS Long Term Plan, but we know that healthcare professionals do not always understand and implement the Mental Capacity Act 2005, resulting in tragic consequences. For example, in the case of Brenda Grant, life-sustaining treatment was provided against the patient’s wishes for 22 months because those responsible for her care did not pay attention to her legally binding advance decision. More recently, Jillian Rushton received life-sustaining treatment over several years even though she had taken great pains to refuse it. This was because her GP failed to ensure that her legally binding advance decision was properly communicated to hospital staff Thirdly, if we are to make a genuine commitment to person-centred end-of-life care and move away from traditional paternalistic approaches, maintaining an explicit focus on individual care preferences in key documents such as this Bill is vital. For all these reasons, I would like to see the points about preferences in care and advance decisions, if not reintroduced into the Bill, certainly recognised as part of the palliative care framework The second provision needing to be reintroduced relates to education and training. I would also like to see the comprehensive section on supporting health and care professionals to provide care, particularly in line with the Mental Capacity Act, which appears in Clause 3 of the 2016 Bill, incorporated into the palliative care framework. While the BMA and the Royal College of Physicians have developed excellent guidance on clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, it is clear that not all health and care professionals learn about and implement these guidelines. Giving legal weight to ensuring that all health and care professionals have the necessary knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours needed to care for people with palliative care needs is essential if person-centred end-of-life care is to become a reality The third provision needing to be reintroduced relates to research. I am sorry to see no mention of research to improve the data we have on palliative care, such as was part of the previous Bill. This is crucial if we are to measure and analyse the effectiveness of palliative care and see where improvements could be made. Moreover, with no information about whether the VOICES survey of bereaved people will be rerun, placing on a statutory footing data collection and research on advances in end-of-life care assumes an enhanced importance. The VOICES surveys provided much-needed information on quality and co-ordination of care, efficacy of pain relief, and quality of communication between healthcare professionals and the patient’s loved ones, among other things. It is vital either that the VOICES survey is reintroduced or that alternative methods of collecting a wide range of data on the quality of care and symptom control at the end of life are developed. Therefore, I hope that the noble Baroness may be willing to add such provisions to her Bill Finally, palliative care is not always sufficient. It cannot relieve all the pain and suffering of all dying patients. It is not a panacea. While in the vast majority of cases palliative care can give dying people a good death, it is important to be clear that it will not always be effective, nor will it be suitable for a small but significant minority of people approaching the end of life. That being so, it is important to say that a comprehensive end-of-life care regime must necessarily include a safeguarded assisted dying component for those who want it.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-06-14-lords.u8	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-06-14	Low, Colin MacKenzie	Improve palliative care provisions	2019-06-14 00:00:00	2019-06-14 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons	My constituent’s savings are invested in buy-to-let mortgages in flatted properties. The block height is less than 18 metres, so post-Grenfell regulations on cladding inspection and local authority certification do not apply. Despite that, surveyors are zero-valuing the properties, lawyers will not handle sales and replacement mortgages are impossible, so properties in that specific height range are currently worthless. May I get a Government statement on how they will address this issue?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-05-commons.u249	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-05	Brown, Alan	Cladding rules hurting property value	2020-11-05 00:00:00	2020-11-05 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-27-lords	My Lords, some dozen years ago I gave David Cameron a paper entitled Reducing the Cost of Politics. I stand by most of it. It covered, for instance, the fact that there are too many councillors—often people cannot get people to stand in council seats—and too many spads, far too many researchers in the Commons hanging around Portcullis House, too many Ministers and far too many Peers With regard to the House of Lords, I suggested a retrospective time limit, say 17 or 22 years, which is not that far from the Burns report suggestion. Yet when I put forward the idea of retrospectivity in a debate on the Burns report, I noticed that it was not met with universal acclaim in your Lordships’ House. I also suggested a Commons of some 500 Members. I remember that David Cameron said to me that “Turkeys will never vote for Christmas”, but then, and perhaps I had some influence on this, he put in the 2010 manifesto a reduction down to 600 The reason why that was not carried through under the coalition was that the Liberal Democrats reneged on the commitment. My memory is better than those of the noble Lords, Lord Rennard and Lord Oates: the commitment to fewer constituencies was linked to the PR vote, which they lost. The Bill was very eloquently introduced by Nick Clegg, as my noble friend Lord Young said. He then realised that his party might lose seats so he betrayed the coalition agreement. That did not actually help the Lib Dems, who went down to eight seats from 57-odd—eight too many, some would say, but I did win some money on the bet As a former MP of 23 years, and like my noble friend Lord Hayward, who has great experience of this matter and of psephology, I know that the arguments around Boundary Commission recommendations are based very often on personal interest or party-political interest; indeed, my noble friend Lord Dobbs referred to them as “sordid party shenanigans”. MPs are worried about their own seats and parties are worried about their chances of winning elections. We hear complete nonsense spouted about why some change or other should not happen After 23 years as an MP I dismiss the idea that an MP cannot deal with 100,000 constituents. Of course they can—easily. I do not claim to have been an especially brilliant MP—I am sure that nobody will be really surprised to hear that—but I never had any complaints about not dealing with constituents’ problems. Quite the opposite—although you might not always have liked my way of dealing with them. There are too many Members of the House of Commons and there are far too many Peers. They start all-party parliamentary groups because they have got to keep themselves busy somehow. I do not support the Government in keeping 650 MPs. There are too many politicians. Let us reduce the size of the Commons and the Lords, and the number of politicians all round, and the cost of politics. That might start in some way to restore the damaged faith of the British public in politics and its practitioners. We should do the right thing.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-27-lords.u182	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-27	Robathan, Andrew	Reduce number of politicians	2020-07-27 00:00:00	2020-07-27 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons	The lack of direct condemnation of Donald Trump’s threats by either the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary was actually pretty shameful. Putting to one side for just a moment the Government’s desperate need for a US trade deal, will the Minister do what her colleagues have failed to do and unequivocally condemn the White House and President Trump for his reckless and provocative threats?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-16-commons.u45	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-16	Newlands, Gavin Andrew Stuart	Condemn Trump threats	2020-01-16 00:00:00	2020-01-16 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons	If the hon. Lady is concerned about funding for local public services, she will join me and my colleagues in supporting the best local government settlement we have seen for a decade. She says that council tax is regressive, so what happened under the last Labour Government, when council tax doubled? Under this Government council tax has fallen by 6% in real terms, while we have continued to deliver important public services I was determined to champion local government in September’s spending review. I want to thank those who responded so constructively to the two consultations we ran at the end of last year. We can be proud of what we have achieved, and particularly of how the settlement delivers for the most vulnerable in society. It secures £1 billion of new Government funding for social care, alongside the extra £410 million that we invested last year. That is a major new injection of funding that will help local authorities to meet the undoubted rising pressures on the care system, which we all see in our communities and in our own lives We will also be maintaining all funding going into the improved better care fund, at the same time as the NHS contribution to the better care fund rises by 3.4% above inflation to over £4 billion, in line with the broader NHS settlement. Alongside this, I am allowing local authorities responsible for adult social care to raise council tax by an additional 2% above the core referendum principle. That is a necessary step that is specifically targeted to meet demand and ensure that vulnerable people are supported.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-02-24-commons.u476	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-02-24	Jenrick, Robert Edward	Local government funding increases	2020-02-24 00:00:00	2020-02-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons	As required by the 2018 Act, we will prepare draft legislation by the end of 2020. All the overseas territories are expected to have fully functioning public registers in place by the end of 2023, as my hon. Friend says, as part of the Government’s call for all countries to make such registers the global norm by that date. The plan is to make 2023 consistent for both.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-22-commons.u86	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-01-22	Duncan, Alan James Carter	Public registers by 2023	2019-01-22 00:00:00	2019-01-22 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-commons	It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for North East Derbyshire (Lee Rowley). I share his desire to maintain the debate about Black Lives Matter and racism and discrimination in our society. I hope and expect that it will continue As we break for the summer recess, I have a long list of issues that I would have liked to raise in this debate. I have written letters to Ministers about many of them, but have not received a reply for several months. I could have picked any of them, but I will focus on an area of urgent concern that I hope will be put at the top of the Minister’s to-do list—namely, the national scrubs crisis I would like to take this opportunity to thank the volunteers across the country who have worked very hard to rise to the challenge of the national scrubs crisis. Demand went up hugely. Previously, 20% of healthcare workers had to wear scrubs, but since covid-19 most of them now do so. The Government have simply not risen to meet that demand, so volunteers across the country—from Shetland to Devon, and at the Putney Scrub Hub— have stepped up. They have sewn and cut and worked all hours. I pay particular tribute to Rosie Taylor-Davies, who has led an amazing team of volunteers. They have made 4,000 scrub sets for the Royal Marsden Hospital and 3,000 sets for St George’s Hospital, and have also supplied care homes, dentists and breast-screening clinics. These are not small orders; they meet a large, industrial-scale need In response to a recent survey, 61% of UK doctors said that the hospital where they work faces a shortage of scrubs. This situation risks the sharing and spreading of the virus. Dentists have told me that they did not feel that they needed to close down during this crisis. They could have stayed open, as happened in Germany, but they had to close because of the lack of PPE, including scrubs. That simply cannot happen if there is a second wave At the same time, there have been multimillion-pound contracts for PPE, which need to be explained. They include a £252 million agreement with Ayanda Capital Ltd, a company owned by the Horlick family through an entity based in Mauritius, which is a tax haven. In addition, £108 million-worth of PPE contracts were entered into with a chocolatier and a supplier of pigeon netting—strange choice. And an £18.5 million contract was awarded in May to Aventis Solutions, which is an employment agency with net assets of £332. During this week’s hearing of the Select Committee on Science and Technology, the Secretary of State failed to provide any answers to the questions asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Brent Central (Dawn Butler) as to why those contracts were awarded and how much PPE they have actually provided We do not have a national plan on scrubs, so we are relying on volunteers such as Putney Scrub Hub in Roehampton, which has taken over squash courts and is working all hours to make the scrubs that we need. Garment factories are lying unused and garment workers are unemployed, even though we have this huge need. Months into the crisis, we are still relying on volunteers to meet this need. It cannot go on How much longer are the Government planning to rely on volunteers to provide basic health equipment? Why is there no sustainable national scrubs manufacturing plan, with a proper UK supply chain using garment factories to meet the needs of all of our health workers? We have applauded them on Thursdays and we know how much we owe them, yet many of them lack the basic equipment. Medical students have been told to provide their own. Doctors have been told to bring in tracksuits. People have been told that they need a call-out for children’s pyjamas for medical need Will the Minister please put this issue at the top of his to-do list over the summer recess? Will he bring together the Treasury, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and the Department of Health and Social Care to put together and deliver an urgent scrubs plan before we return in September, so that all our NHS and healthcare workers have the equipment they need, and all the volunteers at Putney Scrub Hub and across the country can put away their sewing machines, put down their scissors and get back to their normal lives?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-22-commons.u341	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-22	Anderson, Fleur	National scrubs crisis demands action	2020-07-22 00:00:00	2020-07-22 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons	T7. Hundreds of small businesses—particularly retailers, perhaps—stand to benefit from Mansfield’s progress in the future high streets fund. I know that the Minister has to be impartial, although I am sure that behind closed doors Mansfield is his favourite bid. Would he be willing to meet me to discuss the bid and make sure that we get the right advice and the best possible bang for our buck to support those businesses?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-16-commons.u142	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-16	Bradley, Benjamin David	Support for Mansfield retailers requested	2019-07-16 00:00:00	2019-07-16 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons	Given the ongoing police inquiry into the leaking of confidential Foreign and Commonwealth Office documents, together with the need to protect the freedom of the press, my right hon. Friend has a difficult circle to square. Can he tell the House how he intends to both protect the freedom of the press and ensure that the person responsible for this crime is brought to book?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-15-commons.u133	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-07-15	Gale, Roger James	Balancing press freedom accountability	2019-07-15 00:00:00	2019-07-15 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-17-lords	My Lords, I begin by saying how much I agree with the remarks of my noble friend Lord Empey. This is my first day back in the Chamber, and in London, since 18 March. I came down yesterday from Penrith on an 11-coach train. There were two people in my carriage, 30 on the whole train, and I am appalled at the empty streets and inactivity in London: that has to change I wish to comment on part 2 of the digital services tax. I approve of this tax, but not because these companies are indulging in so-called tax evasion—they are not, they are simply operating under all the existing rules agreed with the OECD. The trouble is that these rules are now way out of date, because we need the revenue from these companies to repair the damage they are doing to society I detest Twitter, Facebook and all other forms of anti-social media. Every week, feeble Governments around the world beg them to take down vile paedophile stuff, terrorist-supporting websites or fake news, and every week, these new masters of the universe tell us to clear off. How many millions of children around the world are now traumatised because of online Twitter abuse? If we cannot get them to stop their activities, which are damaging millions of people, then we have to tax them so that we have the resources to deal with the problems they have created, just as we tax tobacco to get more money for the NHS. In the last 20 years, Chancellors have taxed petrol or diesel more highly to deal with climate change—leaving aside the disastrous policy of Gordon Brown and the then chief scientist, David King, to replace petrol with diesel, which was going to be better for us. These digital companies should pay a digital tax so that we have the money to spend on children’s mental health, anti-terrorist activity and taking down paedophiles Then I come to Amazon. I use it a lot and I hate doing so. I desperately try to use physical, local shops, just to keep them going, but it is a losing battle, because Amazon, with its giant warehouses, pays hardly any rates and can undercut everyone else. We all know that our high-street shops are being destroyed, and Amazon is a major destroyer, aided by a rating system that is no longer fit for purpose. These giant Amazon distribution centres are treated like a big farmer’s shed, at ridiculously low rateable values, whereas shops on the high street have excessive rateable values. The Amazon distribution centres are, in effect, giant retail shops and should be treated as such Last year, Amazon, which made £8 billion from its total sales in the UK, paid a derisory £63 million in rates. The Debenhams rates bill is £80 million per annum; House of Fraser’s is £18 million per annum. Is it any wonder that these shops are being pushed to the verge of extinction when up against Amazon? John Lewis has a rates bill of £170 million and a net revenue of £172 million, and it did employ 80,000 people: a great British company which looks after all its workers is now just one of many being crucified by Amazon. The owner of Amazon makes $9 million per hour; he could pay the annual UK business rates for Amazon in just nine hours’ trading. Therefore, while I support a digital services tax—but at a much higher rate than 2%—it is only part of the solution. We must have urgent business rates reform to save our high-street shops.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-17-lords.u14	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-17	Maclean, David John	Amazon taxes critical reform needed	2020-07-17 00:00:00	2020-07-17 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons	I agree with my hon. Friend. There has been substantial extra funding, guaranteed funding, to the Scottish Government—£8.2 billion, as he correctly identified. That is money received through the Barnett formula. The Scottish Government must not shirk their responsibility to be open and transparent about how that money is being spent. We need accountability so that the people of Scotland can judge whether it is being spent wisely.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-11-11-commons.u9	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-11-11	Jack, Alister William	Scottish funding accountability needed	2020-11-11 00:00:00	2020-11-11 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-commons	Yes, I am going to mention that. I know that my council has had so many extra rubbish collections during covid due to people gathering on beaches, which is a significant problem. I thank my hon. Friend for raising that Many people pass by these canisters without knowing what they are. Some will have picked them up, examined them and speculated imaginatively about their use. Among young people, the use of nitrous oxide is endemic. Every single sixth-former and university or college student in Britain will know what those silver canisters are. Nitrous oxide—also known as laughing gas, NOS, NOx, whippits, balloons or chargers—is a psychoactive drug covered by the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. It can be taken legally, but it cannot by law be sold or given away to others for the purpose of inhalation in a recreational capacity.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-commons.u425	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-21	Duffield, Rosemary Clare	Nitrous oxide misuse concern raised	2020-07-21 00:00:00	2020-07-21 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-lords	My Lords, in welcoming the Minister’s opening remarks, perhaps I might pursue some issues about which I have written to her, particularly about people facing Covid-19 without safety nets—in war zones, shanty towns, slums or refugee camps, or as one of an already persecuted minority. What is the international community saying about the stigmatisation and violence directed at Muslim minorities in India, who are blamed for the spread of the virus, or Christian and Hindu minorities in Pakistan, who are denied access to food packages In Nigeria, under the cover of Covid, terror groups such as Boko Haram have intensified the frequency of attacks. Are we getting help to victims, seeking to end the violence, and seeking to bring perpetrators to justice? In the many places without safety nets, what is our assessment of the likely impact of the inevitable world recession and hunger following Covid, and the reversal of development gains What of China, which has been increasing Africa’s indebtedness and dependency? With African countries accounting for more than a quarter of United Nations member states, this dependency and indebtedness has serious consequences for the conduct of international relations. It has emboldened China in resisting calls for an independent international inquiry into the causes of Covid-19 and into the role of the World Health Organization, as we have heard from many preceding speakers. What is the Government’s assessment of the extent of the WHO’s complicity with the Chinese regime, the extent of the Chinese regime’s influence over the WHO, and the prospects for reform of the WHO With 120 countries, including the UK, today at the assembly renewing the call for an independent inquiry, can the Minister tell us how the international community intends to take forward that proposal, establishing the genesis of a virus which is claiming hundreds of thousands of lives all over the world and doing incalculable damage to fragile societies and economies, and societies without any kind of safety net?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-05-18-lords.u169	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-05-18	Alton, David	Global Covid-19 impact concerns raised	2020-05-18 00:00:00	2020-05-18 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords	My Lords, I want to speak briefly in support of Amendment 63. I have also added my name to Amendment 65. As the noble Baroness, Lady Drake, has just outlined, consumer protection has to be paramount. There has to be significant concern that, once a dashboard is up and running, we will need to learn lessons before further activity takes place. If we have a public service dashboard for a minimum of a year, we will have chances to learn lessons that otherwise might not be learned—particularly in light of such issues as data concerns, types of protected benefits and requirements for MaPS guidance. I am most grateful to the Minister for accepting the concept of requiring MaPS advice or guidance before any transfers. This is an important issue. I therefore hope that the Government will recognise the necessity of ensuring that private dashboards do not start before the public dashboard has been tried, tested and reported upon in Parliament The principle of Amendment 68, tabled by my noble friend Lord Young, is right. I would just advise caution on the issue of data accuracy and the lack of data standards, and the fact that it may simply not be possible for a dashboard and the data to be ready in the timescale he is suggesting, but the thrust of it and having an end date is absolutely the right way forward.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-06-30-lords.u206	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-06-30	Altmann, Rosalind	Supports specific dashboard amendments	2020-06-30 00:00:00	2020-06-30 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-lords	My Lords, I thank the noble Lord Whitty, for tabling and introducing this important debate. I concur with what he said and the Shelter report. I draw attention to my interests, particularly as a board member of a housing association, and join other noble Lords in congratulating the noble Baroness, Lady Osamor, on her humbling maiden speech In the excellent Library briefing on the topic, we are reminded that the number of socially rented homes has been falling consistently in England since the 1980s and that in 2016 only 17% of homes fell into this category, compared to 25% in 1981. At the same time, the number of households in privately rented accommodation has risen and statistics show that private renters spend a much higher proportion of their incomes on rent than social renters. Renters in London, particularly those in younger age group—between 25 and 34—are facing increasing housing costs. This affects in particular key workers in the public sector, who need to be near to hospitals, schools, ambulance centres and other places in which they serve. Crisis argues that insecure tenancies in the private sector have led to an increase in the cases of homelessness and the placing of some young families in bed and breakfast. At the weekend, I looked on the Mayor of London’s website for a socially rented home with two bedrooms in south London. None is available The Government acknowledge these issues and in 2017 committed with local councils to build more social homes, as outlined in last year’s Green Paper. The Government say that they will promote ambitious new pro-development deals to build more social housing, yet a quick review of flats for sale in London at reasonable prices—between £150,000 and £500,000—revealed 18,000 properties, some of which were doubtless sold under right to buy. Many such properties are being sold by older people who wish to sell and move to smaller properties, often outside the metropolis, or by families who want to leave London. Could not a government capital scheme be devised to encourage housing associations and councils to buy back many of those homes, possibly at a slightly discounted rate of, let us say, 90% of the estimated value, and refurbish them quickly to house many of those families in desperate need of two or three-bedroomed social rent properties? Housing associations could carry out this regeneration quite quickly while still undertaking to build new homes, including smaller units for people whose families now live independently and are themselves ready to downsize While I have used housing in London as an example, it is equally important to consider how redundant stock in rural communities, or stock that has been for sale for a long period without being purchased, could be redistributed as social housing if a capital scheme enabled councils and housing associations to buy back properties. This would be particularly useful in expensive housing areas such as rural villages in Devon and Cornwall, where holiday home ownership has sent property prices soaring. I would welcome the Minister’s response on this matter, as it could provide a catalyst for increasing provision in tandem with the provision of new-build homes.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-01-31-lords.u100	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-01-31	Watkins, Mary	Lack of affordable social housing	2019-01-31 00:00:00	2019-01-31 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons	My right hon. Friend will know that I have supported all the measures that have been put in place, and I have put my faith in the Government and the scientists and medical officers. However, I have real worries about Harlow in Essex being put into tier 3, as local hospitality businesses are really struggling and on their knees. I would be grateful if he could explain how further restrictions will curb the disease, given that cases increased in Harlow during the second national lockdown. I understand that the virus has recently stabilised in Harlow and that there has been no rate of increase in the over-60s in the last week. Further to this, the overall increase in cases in Harlow is 12% against a regional average of 40%, so I ask him to consider keeping Harlow in tier 2.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-14-commons.u147	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-14	Halfon, Robert Henry	Opposition to Harlow tier 3	2020-12-14 00:00:00	2020-12-14 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-14-lords	My Lords, the Government’s enormously challenging task is to balance competing public goods: our health, our wealth, our future and our happiness, which comes from social interaction with friends, colleagues and loved ones. In a pandemic, though, if you focus hard on any one you risk all the rest. The least damaging, and most beneficial, action would surely be for us all to take heed of the rules on intermingling, and of the “hands, face, space” mantra, in every aspect of our lives. However, many do not. Every speaker in this debate could cite multiple examples from their day-to-day lives of the widespread and flagrant disregarding of Covid guidance. Are we doing enough to persuade, not with earnest homilies from the Dispatch Box but with a drive on mass media, using the best creative minds and targeting every part of the community? We succeeded with seat belts and smoking; why not with masks Secondly, are we doing enough to dissuade? Do we not now need to focus on tighter enforcement, underpinned by sanctions? We press down on speeding and unlawful parking; why not on oversized groups, social distancing and the wearing of masks? Attacking the root behavioural causes of the spread of the virus is surely the most painless way of halting the drift towards more and more areas of the country joining my home city in tier 3.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-10-14-lords.u194	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-10-14	Birt, John	Enforce Covid-19 rules better	2020-10-14 00:00:00	2020-10-14 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-lords	My Lords, we are in a highly volatile and dangerous world, but despite that I am afraid that Her Majesty’s most gracious Speech is rather light on defence. I have become used to what successive Prime Ministers have described as the most important responsibility for any Government, the defence and security of our nation and people—and of course it is—being consigned to the end of the speech, and on this occasion only 26 words nod towards the funding necessary to ensure our nation has the requisite Armed Forces The statement that: “My Government will continue to invest in our gallant Armed Forces” is meaningless. There are presumably idealists who would not wish to invest in our Armed Forces, but in this very dangerous world, while we may try to avoid conflict, the same, I am afraid, is not true of everyone whom we confront in this world. Hilaire Belloc captured the reality with his little rhyme: “Pale Ebenezer thought it wrong to fight, But Roaring Bill (who killed him) thought it right. ” I do not want my nation to be killed The Government quite correctly plan to undertake an integrated security, defence and foreign policy review to reassess the nation’s place in the world. That is absolutely right and I am delighted that it is going ahead. We need clarity over our foreign policy now that so many of the old certainties have disappeared and been replaced by confusion. However, I am concerned about the basis on which the review is being conducted. Downing Street has started setting out parameters, one of which is that “the new strategy will seek to modernise defence”— fine— “while reducing costs in the long term. ” The 2010 and 2015 SDSRs were incoherent cost-cutting exercises with little regard to strategy or strategic thought. It seems that our political culture recognises only as much threat as it is willing to spend money on, rather than the realities of the world. One of our many strategic delusions is to undertake reviews that set objectives based on an analysis of the strategic environment and then simply refuse to fund the consequent strategy Since the last SDSR in 2015, a growing number of defence experts, many of them in this House, have pointed out that there is not sufficient money in the defence budget for the planned defence force 2025. I personally have raised that issue on numerous occasions. Time and again we have been told that we are wrong and everything is fine. Lo and behold, on 20 December the Defence Secretary said that there was a shortfall in funding in the Ministry of Defence budget—what a surprise—and the military will have to “cut its cloth to meet its ambitions. ” That is an insult. These are not the military’s ambitions but, rather, the requirement identified by the Government in SDSR 2015 to ensure the security of our nation and people, which has not been properly funded I am afraid that there is a large lobby, including senior officials in Whitehall. who are willing to take ever greater risks with the defence of our nation. As for spads’ advice, well, defence spending is not a vote winner, so we get no joy from them at all We have taken risk on risk, and I fear that trying to use cyber and the impact of the fourth industrial revolution as a way of saving money and pretending that our forces have the same effect is naive in the extreme. Yes of course there have been these huge changes. I was the first Cyber Minister in 2009; I am aware of these changes. But that does not mean you can save money on defence by using these other ways of fighting. Kinetic effect is still very important In the gracious Speech, the Government say they will promote and expand the UK’s interests and influence in the world, stand firm against those who threaten the UK’s values and try to encourage peace and security globally. All of this demands hard, as well as soft, power, and I am afraid that the Government are not investing in hard power. They will not achieve any of these things unless we have hard, as well as soft, power I do, however, Mr Cummings’s concerns about defence procurement, which needs a shake-up, but let us be clear: politicians have been guilty over the years of repeatedly seeking cost savings during build that reduce capability and push up cost; delaying main-gate decisions, again boosting costs; changing their minds about what they want an asset to do; and repeatedly changing their minds about the number of assets to be procured, then pushing up development and construction costs per unit. They have done this again and again, so it is not clear-cut. The aircraft carrier programme suffered all of these, but, despite that, Britain has now paid for and has in service two world-beating aircraft carriers—thank goodness —even though successive British Governments have done all they could to destroy our shipbuilding industry The Prime Minister recently stated that our nation requires “a shipbuilding industry and Royal Navy that reflect the importance of the seas to our security and prosperity. ” Hurrah for that. The recent order of five frigates to replace those going out of service does not achieve this aim. Our shipyards and SMEs are collapsing. They need commitment and a large rolling programme, and the Navy is desperate for more ships. The shortage has already been felt in the Gulf. Should—God forfend—there be military action in the Gulf, we may find that we are wanting. Expansion of the fleet and enhanced defence spending are an urgent requirement.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-07-lords.u105	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-01-07	West, Alan William John	Lacking defence funding and strategy	2020-01-07 00:00:00	2020-01-07 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords	It was a prescient Question, was it not Will the noble Earl, who is known for his integrity and honesty, confirm that Parliament normally goes into recess for party conferences, so that committees can sit and Questions can be tabled, and that Prorogation is normally prior to a Queen’s Speech and usually less than a week? So a Prorogation of five weeks, with no opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive, is both unprecedented and unconstitutional.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-09-03-lords.u39	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-09-03	Foulkes, George	Unprecedented unconstitutional prorogation duration	2019-09-03 00:00:00	2019-09-03 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-lords	Obviously, the House of Commons has not yet voted, so it is somewhat difficult for us to plan business on a hypothetical. I hope, however, noble Lords will also recognise that, through the usual channels, we have given this House ample opportunities to express its view and will. Obviously, we will have to see what happens in the House of Commons tonight, and we will then have discussions in the usual way to see what we can facilitate for the House. We will certainly attempt to do that.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-25-lords.u94	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-03-25	Evans, Natalie	Pending Commons vote dictates actions	2019-03-25 00:00:00	2019-03-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-lords	My Lords, I apologise for leaping in earlier; it is not like Radio 4. It is an absolute disgrace that things discussed at the National Security Council are leaked. I hope the Minister can tell us exactly what is to be done about this and how it will be looked into. It is really disgraceful On the work that is going on, does the Minister not agree that it is really important to complete that full survey? This is such a complex subject. Many of the firms referred to have exactly the same sort of problems as Huawei does. We have used Huawei since 2009. We know there are risks. We must never forget that China is a very real risk—let us face it: it has, on an industrial scale, stolen IP from us—but that does not mean that we cannot use its equipment in certain ways, as long as our experts are able to modify that risk.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-25-lords.u63	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-04-25	West, Alan William John	Disgraceful leaks; evaluate Huawei risks	2019-04-25 00:00:00	2019-04-25 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons	The answer to that, I think pretty clearly, is no. The roadway is for all users. Cycling infrastructure is used to try to preserve and protect cyclists. If that had the effect of forcing people into cycle lanes, it might have all kinds of road safety consequences that we would like to avoid.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-21-commons.u26	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-21	Norman, Alexander Jesse	Roadway inclusion, avoid segregation consequences	2019-03-21 00:00:00	2019-03-21 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-lords	This is indeed a difficult area. The Government’s forthcoming fuel poverty strategy aims to reduce barriers to accessing support for households living in these sorts of home types, including park homes and similar. Many suppliers now provide the £140 warm home discount rebate to otherwise eligible households living in park homes through the warm home discount industry initiatives. Such households may additionally benefit from the green homes grant voucher scheme, which can provide up to £10,000 for low-income households in order to improve the energy inefficiency of their homes.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-08-lords.u19	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-12-08	Bloomfield, Olivia	Fuel poverty strategy and support	2020-12-08 00:00:00	2020-12-08 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-lords	While my noble friend Lord Cormack’s words are fresh in your Lordships’ ears, I remind the House of what happened in 2005, when the then Labour Government sent a Bill providing for the incarceration of suspected terrorists for 90 days without access to the law. This House sat from 2.30 pm on a Thursday until 7.31 pm on Friday night without ceasing to vote down amendments put by the House of Commons.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-07-22-lords.u86	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-07-22	Elton, Rodney	2005 anti-terror bill rejection	2019-07-22 00:00:00	2019-07-22 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-commons	We are committed to finding a solution to the north-south border that protects the Belfast/Good Friday agreement. We can best meet those commitments if we explore solutions other than the backstop. The backstop risks weakening the delicate balance embodied in the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, which was grounded in agreement, consent and respect for minorities. Removing control of the commercial and economic life of Northern Ireland to an external body over which the people of Northern Ireland have no control risks undermining that balance. Any deal on Brexit on 31 October must avoid the whole or just part—that is, Northern Ireland—being trapped in an arrangement where it is a rule taker The Government intend to set out more detail on our position on an alternative to the backstop in the coming days. In the meantime, I assure the House that under no circumstance will the UK place infrastructure, checks or controls at the border. Both sides have always been clear that the arrangements for the border must recognise the unique circumstance of the island of Ireland and, reflecting that, be creative and flexible The Prime Minister’s European Union sherpa, David Frost, is leading a cross-Government team in these detailed negotiations with taskforce 50. We have shared in written form a series of confidential technical non-papers, which reflect the ideas the United Kingdom has been putting forward. Those papers are not the Government setting out their formal position. These meetings and our sharing of confidential technical non-papers show that we are serious about getting a deal—one that must involve the removal of the backstop.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-10-01-commons.u182	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-10-01	Duddridge, James Philip	Oppose backstop find alternative solutions	2019-10-01 00:00:00	2019-10-01 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons	Detaining innocent people and threatening them with deportation is not only wholly unacceptable; it is dehumanising. The treatment suffered by my constituent, Paulette Wilson, was absolutely appalling. Why did the Government not come clean about these caps last week when we were in the Chamber questioning the Home Secretary? And how on earth did the Government come up with the figure of £500 per 24-hour period for the first 30 days of detention and £300 per 24-hour period for the subsequent 60 days? How were these amounts arrived at?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-09-commons.u265	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-09	Reynolds, Emma Elizabeth	Unjust detention and questionable fines	2019-04-09 00:00:00	2019-04-09 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-01-commons	This Thursday is Merchant Navy Day, and in normal circumstances—if we can remember what they were—we would have been conducting a church service in my constituency, remembering not just the merchant fleet, but fishermen whose lives have been lost at sea. It is always a reminder, though we do not need to be reminded, of how dangerous fishing is. We particularly remember the 36 crew who went down with the Gaul on the night of 8 and 9 February 1974 in what was described as “the worst ever single-trawler tragedy” The boat had originally been the Ranger Castor and sailed from North Shields, and six of the men who lost their lives came from North Tyneside, so we know that fishing was, and fishing remains, a dangerous industry The Bill is a framework Bill: it will create a framework for the industry post the common fisheries policy. Some will describe it, I am sure, as a landmark Bill, and with or without a deal in the next few months, we need a framework going forward. As such, I would like to see a greater priority and a bigger mention for safety in the Bill. I can see only one fleeting reference to “health and safety” in the Bill, so I hope that as the Bill progresses, safety can be given a greater prominence and actually be on the face of the Bill The Bill rightly puts sustainability at the heart of our fishing policy going forward— the notion, put simply, that we never take more than can be replaced. To be fair, even the common fisheries policy recognised the importance of sustainability, but for its critics, it always seemed overcentralised and inflexible in its approach. We need to learn the best lessons from that, including in our fisheries management plan, which needs to be flexible and I hope will be at least regional. Actually, I hope that it will be as locally focused as possible, because only in that way will we recognise the different needs of different fisheries at any time There is a fairness issue that we also need to address in the Bill, and we have heard different views on it already in this debate—that is, the fair distribution of quota, particularly to under-10-metre boats. Currently, they receive around 6%. If that was increased by 1% or 2%, that would increase the quota for smaller boats by around a quarter. They are the backbone of many local fleets—North Shields in my constituency included—and they should be, in my view, at the heart of a sustainable approach A further pillar in the Bill is the desirability of landings in UK ports, which should accrue benefits to all parts of the UK. Again, I would like the Bill to go further and be more explicit. I do not think the Government would necessarily disagree with this as a principle: if fish are caught in UK waters, they ought to be landed in UK ports, because the Bill is about jobs, and important though the catching sector is, for every single job in the catching sector there are around nine jobs on land. The reality is that too many of our fishing ports struggle to survive. Ports such as North Shields require constant investment, and currently, for example, the protection jetty is being repaired using European fisheries fund money. It is unrealistic that the money needed for repair and regeneration will come from the industry or even from the ports, which are often struggling in these difficult times. If fishing is a national asset, fishing ports should be seen as part of the national infrastructure The Bill allows for the expansion of financial assistance schemes, but it is not clear from the Bill, or even from what the Minister has said today, what that will actually mean. The former Secretary of State told the House that fishing communities would be able to access the coastal communities fund, which was originally set up to regenerate resorts such as Whitley Bay in my constituency. I do not want to see competition between resorts and coastal fishing communities, both of which have needs and are highly deserving. I want the Minister who sums up the debate to confirm that the coastal communities fund idea has gone, particularly since the Minister in charge of it said that there is no guarantee that the fund will continue and it has not even been signed off by the Treasury for the next few years. Where will the investment that fishing communities need come from Let me finish on this point. North Shields is the biggest prawn port in England, with 95% of prawns landed sold in Europe. Those fishermen need a deal without tariffs and without delay. I have raised the prospect before of access to European markets closing even temporarily and fleets having to tie up. It has happened. It happened during the pandemic when the markets were closed, and I do not want to see that. We need a deal for fishermen. We also need a deal for the wider economy, and that will be very difficult. What we do not need is a deal bought by selling out the fishing industry in the way the Conservative Government did in the 1970s. There is not much time to get one, Minister.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-01-commons.u349	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-01	Campbell, Alan	Fishing industry sustainability and safety	2020-09-01 00:00:00	2020-09-01 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords	My Lords, I would like to speak briefly to Amendment 162 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh. I totally support the words of the noble Lord, Lord Curry, and I too congratulate the Government for introducing Clause 17 into the Bill The excellent thing about Clause 17 is its comprehensive approach. Looking at subsection (2), the relevant factors in these reports—as noted by others—would have to cover a wide range of areas. To name but a few, they would have to report on: our population, its distribution and its nutritional needs; changing tastes and markets; the success or otherwise of a food waste strategy; the percentage of our food that comes from our own diminishing farmland; and port facilities, logistics infrastructure and the cost of transport Externally, they would also have to report on: the world political map with regard to food production and consumption; world political stability, for all sorts of reasons, including transport; and now, of course, the world health outlook. There will be other matters to be examined, but that gives you a taste of the breadth of the subject As the noble Lord, Lord Curry, said, this will inevitably involve a small team of people at Defra permanently trawling for the relevant up-to-date information across this wide landscape, and this small team cannot just be convened every now and again. We have seen this year how quickly a situation can arise. The department needs to have its finger on the pulse, so if this team is permanently doing the work, and hopefully informing Ministers on a regular basis, why not have done with it and produce a report on an annual, or at the very least biennial, basis? Whether this report needs to be laid formally before Parliament is another matter. Personally, I would support an annual basis, as in Amendment 162.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-21-lords.u245	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2020-07-21	Cameron, Ewen	Support for annual food report	2020-07-21 00:00:00	2020-07-21 00:00:00	Upper house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords	Following the noble Lord, I am reminded of how much he has done down the years to encourage our engagement in Asia and Asian investment in this country. I feel very sorry for him, because this must be a sad time for him. If you take just Anglo-Japanese relations, his work down the years was remarkable. We know what the Japanese banks here are doing. We know what Hitachi and now Honda are doing. We know what Toshiba is doing. We know about Sony and Panasonic. When will we hear from the third of the great car companies, Toyota? Actually, we did hear from it. It exports 80% of its UK production to the European Union. Its executive vice-president, Didier Leroy, said that: “The UK government should … understand that we cannot stay in this kind of fog when we don’t know what will be the output of the negotiation”, and that any kind of EU import tax would create a huge, “negative impact in terms of competitiveness”, for its UK plant. That quote— “we cannot stay in this kind of fog”— was from October 2017. It is still in this kind of fog. We have not told it anything, so it is not surprising that it has given up and is backing off. It has given up expecting clarity from us.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-02-27-lords.u125	Minutes of the House of Lords, Daily Session 2019-02-27	Kerr, John	Regret over unclear UK-EU relations	2019-02-27 00:00:00	2019-02-27 00:00:00	Upper house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CB	Crossbench	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-commons	There is a strong trans community in Darlington who are valued and appreciated by their employers. Over 200 company leaders have written to the Prime Minister in respect of trans rights. What assessment has my right hon. Friend made of the compatibility of the Government’s position on trans rights with that of corporate Britain?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-09-24-commons.u173	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-09-24	Gibson, Peter Alexander	Government's trans rights policy assessment	2020-09-24 00:00:00	2020-09-24 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons	The Secretary of State and I were in this House when the Conservatives repealed the Child Poverty Act 2010 and when George Osborne announced £12 billion of welfare cuts, which have not been restored, so she can be “disappointed”, but she cannot be surprised that child poverty is up by 200,000, with 65% of children in single-parent families in poverty. Is it not time that she came to the Dispatch Box and confirmed that no child in a single-parent family will be worse off under her system?	ParlaMint-GB_2019-03-28-commons.u291	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-03-28	McGovern, Alison	Criticizing child poverty policies	2019-03-28 00:00:00	2019-03-28 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-commons	I congratulate the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill) on an excellent, lucid speech. I thoroughly enjoy history—I think we all do—and we heard a lot of history in his speech, as well as a lot of passion. I think he mentioned that he had a journey from Labour to the SNP; may I suggest a further journey to the Conservatives? Perhaps he could think about that later. I congratulate the other Members who have made maiden speeches. It has been a pleasure to listen to them all. I remember giving my own nine years ago—how time flies I want to talk briefly about nine different subjects in the Queen’s Speech that affect my constituency. As far as today’s debate is concerned, I congratulate the Government on the ambitious and aspirational path they are taking. I urge a level of common sense in the direction of travel. We do not want to end up with thousands of people in our country unemployed because of ambitious and aspirational targets that are simply not achievable, but that does not mean we should not try The first subject is the national health service. The recent decision to move A&E and maternity services from Poole Hospital to Royal Bournemouth Hospital has understandably caused a lot of anger and disappointment among my constituents, not least those in Swanage. I urge the Government to look at that again The second is social care. Dorset Council is one of two new unitary councils formed recently at the behest of the Government and, of course, the people of Dorset. Huge cuts and sacrifices have been made, and savings too. One of our major problems is paying for social care. The Prime Minister has said that that is high on his agenda. I urge the Government to sort this out as soon as possible, because I do not want our new unitary authority left high and dry, unable to afford social care at this crucial time The third is education. I have fought with the f40 campaign group of lower-funded councils for a levelling up of our schools’ funding. That has been achieved. They have a conference in March near here, which I shall be attending. I spoke to them yesterday, and their view—and mine—is that more fairness is needed in the funding formula, particularly when it comes to special educational needs and disability, which are underfunded in Dorset. We need Government help and for this to be made a priority. Weymouth College in my constituency is the only place where young people have a hope of getting into further education and on to better careers. That, too, needs more funding. Sitting on the Education Secretary’s desk is the tick-box exercise for a new special school on Portland. I urge the Secretary of State to sign it off, so that we can open this much needed facility on Portland as fast as we can The fourth is home ownership. More affordable homes to buy and let are desperately needed—and when I say affordable, I mean truly affordable, not 80% of market rent. We need more one, two and three-bedroom social homes to buy and let. In Dorset we rely on housing providers, as many do now, because council homes have been sold off. The Government have put £2 billion aside for more affordable homes. Perhaps the Minister who sums up the debate will tell us how that money can be reached and how much money is available for Dorset for these desperately needed homes. The fifth is the justice system. Sir James Spicer, the renowned former MP for West Dorset who sadly has now passed away, started a thing called the airborne initiative at Portland young offenders institution, which gets young men out on to the moors with trained instructors from the Army and the Prison Service. It has now gone to Feltham and Brinsford young offenders institutions, and it is hugely successful. I urge the Government to roll that out right across the justice system, because it is working, and reoffending is being cut The fifth subject is the police. Under the current funding formula, Dorset will have 120 more officers, and I urge the Government to stick to that. Dorset needs more police officers The sixth is infrastructure. The dualling of the Salisbury line will help not only me but all passengers on it down to north Devon. If we can put track back on the former bed at Yeovil Junction, it would hugely help access to Weymouth and the island of Portland The seventh is business rates, which have been mentioned. The Government have this on their radar. Business rates need to be looked at, because they are highly punitive, particularly to small businesses Eighth is the transport network—specifically, buses. I cannot understand why the routes given to commercial companies cannot be made compulsory. Yes, perhaps the profit margin will not be excellently wide, but they will still make a profit. Leave it to the entrepreneurs to make money out of these least affordable routes. I am not saying that there should be a regular service to these remote villages, but perhaps, in co-ordination with those who live there, there could be a bus service in the morning and another at lunchtime, so that the elderly can get to the shops and back in time for lunch. I cannot believe that it is beyond the wit of a good entrepreneur and a good company to sort that out My final point concerns the armed services. In my day, spending on the armed forces was 5% of GDP; today it is just 2%. It simply is not enough. We have two aircraft carriers—the most expensive form of defence that we could possibly have. They need planes above, submarines beneath and ships beside, and of course men and women on board. We have to be able to afford them. If we are to play our role outside the EU and stand up for freedom, truth and democracy, as this country has a proud reputation of doing, we need strong armed forces and they need more money On the subject of historical legacies, I was glad to hear the Prime Minister reaffirm at Prime Minister’s questions today that people who served 30 or 40 years ago in Northern Ireland—and of course in past wars, and those who will serve in future—will not be followed to the grave or persecuted when there is no new evidence to prosecute them. With that final point, I conclude my speech.	ParlaMint-GB_2020-01-15-commons.u219	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-01-15	Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, Richard Grosvenor	Constituency issues and government praise	2020-01-15 00:00:00	2020-01-15 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons	Last month, an opinion poll revealed that 68% of Scots want the Scottish and UK Governments to work more closely together. Minister, why is it that, despite that, the Scottish and UK Governments are not able to work in a co-ordinated manner, and why are we constantly seeing mixed messages and infighting?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-12-09-commons.u58	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-12-09	Dhesi, Tanmanjeet Singh	Disunity between Scottish and UK Governments	2020-12-09 00:00:00	2020-12-09 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	LAB	Labour	Opposition	M
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons	Obviously coronavirus has impacted all of us, but one group impacted is the parents of premature and sick babies. I commend to the Secretary of State the briefing paper from Bliss, “Parents aren’t visitors”. Is the Secretary of State willing to meet me, as chair of the all-party group on premature and sick babies, and Bliss to consider the impact the virus has had on the parents of premature and sick babies, and to ensure they get the support they need to support their families at this time?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-07-commons.u236	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-07	Linden, David Melvyn	Support for parents of preemies	2020-07-07 00:00:00	2020-07-07 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	SNP	Scottish National Party	Opposition	M
2019	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons	In the most recent Legal Aid Agency civil tender, the number of offices providing legal aid services on welfare benefits increased by 188%. In February, we set out our legal support action plan, which focused on the importance of early legal support. We will be establishing a number of pilots in a range of areas of law to see how best we can support those in need. It is critical that welfare decisions are made right the first time, and we are working with the Department for Work and Pensions to help ensure that.	ParlaMint-GB_2019-04-23-commons.u47	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2019-04-23	Leigh (Frazer), Lucy Claire	Legal aid services increased	2019-04-23 00:00:00	2019-04-23 00:00:00	Lower house	57	Reference	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	F
2020	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-06-commons	In the worst weather, Walney Island in my constituency of Barrow and Furness splits in two, which risks homes, jobs and our fantastic nature reserve. I know the MOD perhaps does not put nature reserves at the top of its pile of things to care about, but there is another threat—it risks sifting the channel that BAE uses to push subs out into the sea. I am raising this issue across Government: can I ask the MOD’s view on it?	ParlaMint-GB_2020-07-06-commons.u141	Minutes of the House of Commons, Daily Session 2020-07-06	Fell, Simon Richard James	Walney Island erosion concern	2020-07-06 00:00:00	2020-07-06 00:00:00	Lower house	58	COVID	Regular	MP	CON	Conservative	Opposition	M