Author: admin

Priti Patel – 2020 Statement on Countering Terrorism

Below is the text of the statement made by Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 21 January 2020.

The Government’s first priority is to keep families, communities and our country safe. Following the terrorist attack at Fishmongers’ Hall in November 2019 we have reviewed our overall approach to counter-terrorism and the package of measures we have announced today represents a major shift in the UK’s approach to the sentencing and management of terrorist offenders.

The counter-terrorism strategy—CONTEST—was strengthened in 2018 and remains one of the most comprehensive approaches to countering terrorism in the world. But we know the threat we face will to continue to diversify and evolve as it has done in recent years and we must continually assess the effectiveness of our action and remain flexible in adapting our approach.

The package announced today includes a major overhaul of prisons and probation, including tougher monitoring conditions for terrorist offenders and doubling the number of counter-terrorism probation officers. This will also include a full independent review of the multi-agency public protection arrangements. Jonathan Hall QC will lead this review.

A new Counter-Terrorism (Sentencing and Release) Bill, will be introduced in the first 100 days of this Government. The Bill will include measures that will force dangerous terrorist offenders who receive extended determinate sentences to serve the whole time behind bars and will introduce a new statutory minimum sentence of 14 years in prison, which can be applied to those convicted of the most serious terrorist offences.

Funding for CT policing will also grow to £906 million in 2020-21, a £90 million year-on-year increase. The money will support and maintain the record high numbers of ongoing counter-terrorism policing investigations and ensure a swift and effective response to the threat.

The Government will also review the support available to victims of terrorism, including families and loved ones, and immediately invest £500,000 to increase the support provided by the victims of terrorism unit, to ensure more victims get the support and advice they need, faster.

This package of measures sets out how we will continue to build on the UK’s formidable capabilities, experience and expertise to tackle the growing and changing threat from terrorism in all its forms.

24/01/2020
Sajid Javid – 2020 Statement on ECOFIN

Below is the text of the statement made by Sajid Javid, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 21 January 2020.

A meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN) Council will be held in Brussels on 21 January 2020. The Council will discuss the following:

Early morning session

The Eurogroup president will brief the Council on the outcomes of the 20 January meeting of the Eurogroup, and the European Commission will provide an update on the current economic situation in the EU. Following this, Ministers will take stock of the process of nominating a European candidate for the European Bank for Reconstruction and

Development (EBRD) presidency.

Current financial services legislative proposals

The Croatian presidency will provide an update on current legislative proposals in the field of financial services.

Presidency work programme

The Croatian presidency will present its work programme for January to June 2020.

European Green Deal

The European Commission will present the economic and financial aspects of the European Green Deal.

European semester 2020

To launch the new European semester exercise, the European Commission will present the annual sustainable growth strategy, the alert mechanism report, and the Euro area recommendation.

Tax challenges arising from digitalisation

The Council will hold an exchange of views on the state of play of negotiations in the OECD on tax challenges arising from digitalisation.

I would also like to inform the House about the ECOFIN meetings that took place on 5 December 2019 and 8 November 2019.

ECOFIN: 5 December 2019

A meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN) Council was held in Brussels on 5 December 2019. The UK was represented by Matthew Taylor, Director Europe, HM Treasury.

The Council discussed the following:

Early morning session

The Eurogroup president briefed the Council on the outcomes of the 4 December meeting of the Eurogroup, and the European Commission provided an update on the current economic situation in the EU.

Banking Union

The Council noted a report on progress on the banking union.

AOB: Directive as regards disclosure of income tax information

Ministers held an exchange of views on the legal basis for country-by-country reporting of incometax information, as requested by Sweden.

Current financial services legislative proposals

The Commission provided an update on current legislative files in the field of financial services.

Energy taxation

The Council adopted conclusions in regards to energy taxation.

European financial architecture for development

The Council adopted conclusions on the European financial architecture for development.

Climate action work plan

In response to discussions at September informal ECOFIN meeting, the Council approved the proposed work plan on climate action.

“Stable-coins”

The Council and Commission adopted a joint statement on “stable-coins”.

Capital Markets Union

The Commission gave an update on the capital markets union, welcoming work on sustainable finance and FinTech.

Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing

The Council adopted the conclusions on proposed changes to the future EU framework for anti-money laundering and the financing of counter-terrorism.

Sustainable finance

The Council held an exchange of views the sustainable finance.

Non-performing loans

The Commission updated on the action plan for non-performing loans in Europe.

Stability and growth pact

The Council issued decisions confirming no effective action has been taken by Hungary and Romania in response to Council recommendations of June 2019.

AOB: EU list of non-co-operative tax jurisdictions

As an AOB, the Danish delegation requested Ministers to strengthen ambitions on the EU list of non-co-operative tax jurisdictions.

ECOFIN: 8 November 2019

A meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN) was held in Brussels on 8 November 2019. The UK was represented by Mark Bowman (Director General, International Finance, HM Treasury). The Council discussed the following:

Excise duties

The Council discussed the directive on general arrangements for excise duty (recast); the regulation on administrative co-operation of the content of electronic registers; and amendments to the directive on the structures of excise duty on alcohol.

VAT data from payment service providers

The Council agreed a general approach on amendments to: the directive on the common system of VAT with regards to requirements for payment service providers; and the regulation on administrative co-operation in the field of VAT concerning measures to combat VAT fraud.

VAT treatment for small enterprises

The Council agreed amendments to the directive on the common system of VAT in regards to the special scheme for small enterprises.

Current financial services legislative proposals

The Finnish presidency provided an update on current legislative proposals in the field of financial services.

European Central Bank – Executive Board member

The Council adopted a recommendation to the European Council on the appointment of a new member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank.

Digital taxation

The Council was updated on the current state of play of digital taxation and discussed the way forward.

European Fiscal Board report

The Council were presented with the 2019 annual report of the European Fiscal Board.
EU statistical package

The Council adopted Council conclusions on the EU statistical package and to review progress achieved.

Climate finance

The Council adopted Council conclusions on climate finance for the COP25 climate summit.

Follow-up to international meetings

The presidency and Commission informed the Council of the main outcomes of the G20 meeting of Finance Ministers and central bank governors and the IMF and World Bank annual meetings held in October 2019.

Stable coins

As an AOB, the presidency informed the Council about a joint statement on stable-coins ahead of December ECOFIN.

24/01/2020
William Wragg – 2020 Speech on Stepping Hill Hospital

Below is the text of the speech made by William Wragg, the Conservative MP for Hazel Grove, in the House of Commons on 21 January 2020.

May I say what a joy it is to see you back in the Chair, Mr Deputy Speaker?

I am very pleased to have secured this Adjournment debate on Stepping Hill Hospital, which comes at an important time in its development. I wish to discuss with the Minister the current pressures the hospital is facing, its recent performance figures and especially the strain on its accident and emergency and urgent care services. I hope to explain some of the reasons behind those pressures and what needs to be done, in both the short and the long term, to ensure that the hospital improves. In particular, I want to hear what the Minister is able to do to help the hospital and its staff to deliver better care for patients.

Stepping Hill provides a vital service to local residents in both my constituency and, as evidenced by their attendance at this evening’s debate, the constituencies of right hon. and hon. Members across the region. I am a long-term supporter of the hospital, although I am bound to say that, given that it was the place of my birth. I was, of course, pleased that Stepping Hill Hospital was awarded specialist status as part of Greater Manchester’s Healthier Together programme. I backed that bid from the beginning, as a local councillor, parliamentary candidate and Member of Parliament. The hospital is also generally well regarded by local people for the services it provides, and it deserves special praise for the fantastic and difficult job it performed in treating victims of the terrible Manchester Arena bombing in 2017.

The hospital faces difficulties in its performance in a number of areas. Although the latest Care Quality Commission inspection report rates the hospital as good for the care it provides and for leadership, its overall rating is “requires improvement”. The pressures are most acutely felt in emergency care services and in meeting its four-hour target in accident and emergency. In recent years the trust has struggled to consistently achieve the national standard of 95% of patients in the emergency department being seen and treated within four hours. Sadly, the most recent figures published demonstrate that Stepping Hill’s year-to-date position against that standard was 68%.

Those headline figures in no way reflect the work of doctors, nurses and all the other hospital staff, who are working incredibly hard to see, treat and care for the unprecedented number of people currently accessing the emergency department. I place on record my personal thanks to all staff right across the hospital, who provide excellent care for patients, day in, day out.

The reasons for Stepping Hill’s current performance against the standard are multiple and complex. They include the large catchment area it serves, rising demand, local population demographics, the limitation of the current building, a lack of alternative options to the emergency department, and integration with the local health and care system.

Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

First, may I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on what he is doing? I have read some of the background, as I have already told him, and I commend him for his energetic efforts on behalf of his constituents and the hospital. My hospital, like his, has a specialist stroke unit and we want to keep it open, too. Time is of the essence. Does he agree that the retainment and enhancement of specialist services must be a priority in the NHS, no matter what direction it takes?

Mr Wragg

Naturally, I agree with the hon. Gentleman and commend him for his work, particularly in maintaining the stroke services at his local hospital. Indeed, I commend the work of all those who perform such vital roles at Stepping Hill.

In other parts of the country, especially in large cities, people have a number of options for where they can receive care for a range conditions, including as a result of accidents and minor injuries. That means that emergency departments just care for the sickest patients who need resuscitation or emergency care.

Mary Robinson (Cheadle) (Con)

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr Wragg

I give way to my constituency neighbour.

Mary Robinson

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for securing this really important debate. Stepping Hill Hospital serves not only Hazel Grove but High Peak and other parts of Stockport, and I know that there is a lot of interest in this debate. From my point of view, as the MP for Cheadle and as a Stepping Hill Hospital MP, I want to see the hospital really thrive. One of the issues facing the hospital is that it was built to accommodate about 50,000 out-patients—people coming into A&E—a year, and now that figure is going up towards 100,000. That is clearly a pressure on it. Does my hon. Friend agree that the £30.6 million that is going into the new emergency care centre will really make a difference?

Mr Wragg

Absolutely. I congratulate my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour on the work that she has undertaken with me and others from across the region in securing additional funding. I will touch on that later. She is absolutely right, because Stepping Hills’ emergency department is overstretched and facing those rising demands. It was built to treat about 50,000 patients a year but is currently on track, as she says, to exceed 100,000 patients this year.

Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this Adjournment debate. Is it not also important to impress on the Minister the demographic nature of the borough of Stockport, which we all represent? Stockport is a microcosm of the whole country in that it has its own north-south divide. There are real health inequalities between those living in the north of Stockport and those living in the south. In the south of Stockport, people tend to live longer and stay healthier longer, but when they do reach old age, they often have very complex needs.

Mr Wragg

The hon. Gentleman, my constituency neighbour to the north of my constituency, is entirely spot on. His remarks are incisive and to the point, because the demand for emergency care in our area has risen by about 5% in the past year, and in the three months to December alone it increased by 6%. It was previously rare for Stepping Hills’ emergency department to see more than 200 patients a day, but now it is not uncommon for over 300 people to seek treatment per day. Indeed, in Christmas week, over 1,700 patients were seen by the department.

Bed capacity is also a problem at Stepping Hill. A hospital bed system should ideally run at about 85% occupancy to make way for new patients, but at Stepping Hill beds have been frequently running at over 99% occupancy. Having support in place to enable people to return home as quickly as possible once they no longer need acute hospital care is also key to achieving the national standard by improving the flow of patients through the hospital and its emergency departments. As the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) says, Stockport has the highest proportion of elderly people in Greater Manchester, with 19.5% of the population being 65 or older. While increasing longevity is of course to be celebrated, our local population is living longer, often with complex and multiple health conditions, and they place a particular demand on the emergency department that is not seen to the same degree elsewhere in the region.

The hospital has implemented a number of short-term initiatives to try to fix and improve the situation in A&E, particularly to address the extra winter pressures due to influenza and the cold weather. The trust recently spent £1.2 million provided by NHS England to expand the number of consulting and treatment rooms in the existing emergency departments. This winter, Stepping Hill implemented its winter plans two months early, opening an extra 30 beds in the hospital. Even so, concerns this year were so great that they were recognised by the Greater Manchester health and social care partnership. In December, the hospital received an extra £2 million of funding to enable it to open an additional 51 beds until after the end of March this year, increasing staffing and supporting seven-day working.

However, I want to ask a number of questions of my hon. Friend the Minister, for whose consideration this evening I am very grateful. First, despite all those steps and extra beds, in December, alarmingly, 200 people waited for 12 hours or more in the department before a bed could be found for them. I wish therefore to ask him what more can be done by the Government to help Stepping Hill to improve its A&E performance in the short term.

Robert Largan (High Peak) (Con)

I congratulate my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour on securing this debate. I know he is a great advocate for the local NHS and for Stepping Hill Hospital, which many of my constituents use as their local hospital. He touched on the worrying performance figures. Does he agree that we need to get on with building the urgent care centre as soon as possible?

Mr Wragg

First, may I congratulate my hon. Friend on his election in High Peak, which is next door to me, and for working as closely as possible with me on this issue as soon as he was elected? Like him, I welcome the investment that is coming, as I am about to outline.

Opening more temporary beds is not the answer to the pressures on our health and care system. A radical long-term solution is needed if Stepping Hill is to improve its A&E performance. That is why I, the hospital and all Members across the House with an interest in it have called for greater investment. The new £30.6 million of funding will enable the organisation to construct a three-storey, purpose-built emergency care campus. It will include an urgent care treatment centre, a GP assessment unit and a planned investigation unit, as well as a new ambulance access road and improved waiting areas.

The emergency care campus will not be simply a new accident and emergency; it is intended instead to care for patients who require a slightly lower grade of emergency care, thus relieving the pressure on A&E by improving the flow of patients through the hospital from the emergency department. Patients who need resuscitation or emergency care will still be seen in A&E. This much-needed investment will relieve the pressures on accident and emergency by implementing a better triaging system for patients, meaning that they get the right care in the right place. Patients who do not require full A&E emergency care will be seen in one of the three new services at the urgent care campus.

The urgent care treatment centre will provide an alternative for those who do not need resuscitation or emergency care. It is expected to triage about 45 patients a day away from accident and emergency. The GP assessment unit will support patients who are referred by their GP for hospital care, ensuring that they have quick access to the acute and medical specialists they need to see without going through the emergency department, thereby reducing A&E admissions by a further 25 patients a day. The planned investigation unit will improve the time in which patients are returned home with a care plan when they no longer need to access acute care services.

Andrew Gwynne

The hon. Gentleman is being incredibly generous; I am very grateful. I associate myself and my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) with the proposals the hon. Gentleman has outlined.

May I offer the hon. Gentleman some reassurance from across the boundary in the neighbouring borough of Tameside, which my constituency also covers? Fifteen years ago, when I was first elected to this House, the reputations of Stepping Hill Hospital and Tameside Hospital were almost in mirror image. Tameside was not the best place it could be. With great focus and new management, that hospital has been transformed. Does he share my confidence that better days are ahead of Stepping Hill, and my trust in the staff and the management to take the hospital back to where it needs to be?

Mr Wragg

I absolutely concur with the hon. Gentleman. The leadership of the hospital is excellent. I think that, as he says, better days are very near. May I take this opportunity to welcome the hon. Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra), who has come to take part in this debate?

Robert Largan

To follow up on the point made by the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne), it is great to see the progress that has been made at Tameside Hospital, which many of my constituents, particularly those in Glossop, Hadfield and Tintwistle, use as their local hospital. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is fantastic that the Government have committed to a new urgent care centre at Tameside Hospital as well?

Mr Wragg

There is mutual praise and admiration all around in this debate, so I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. It is wonderful that we find such consensus on this issue. Stepping Hill unites us all, and that is something of which we can be proud.

I intend to work closely with the Government, Stockport Council and the hospital trust to support the planning process, so that the new emergency care campus can be built and be up and running, treating patients as soon as possible. That leads to my second question for my hon. Friend the Minister. What timescale does he envisage for the completion of the new urgent care campus, and how confident is he that it can be met? How many more winters will the hospital go through before that new facility is up and running?

No debate on hospitals would be complete without at least a brief discussion of parking, which is often the bane of patients, visitors and staff alike. It is an issue that affects not only those using the hospital but local neighbours. A lack of car-parking capacity, or the desire to avoid charges, often means that cars spill out to use kerbside parking on nearby residential streets, which can prove to be a significant inconvenience. I therefore welcome the Government’s commitment to provide free hospital parking for those who need it most, including disabled patients, parents and carers of sick children staying overnight, and hospital staff working night shifts, who are less able to rely on public transport. That change is long overdue and will make the NHS as accessible as possible for those who need it most.

In addition, I am extremely encouraged that the Government plan to provide more than £200 million of capital funding for new car parks, to support several hospitals across England that need extra car-parking capacity. Does the Minister know which hospitals have been earmarked for that funding and whether Stepping Hill is among them? If he cannot give me a firm answer today, will he meet me following the debate, so that I can make the case again for increasing parking capacity at Stepping Hill?

I look forward to hearing the Minister’s reply, and I hope that he can provide me with the answers to these important questions. I especially hope that he has some ideas on short-term solutions that can be found to help the hospital and its patients while construction work on the emergency campus is carried out. I would also like to take this opportunity to extend an open invitation to him to visit the hospital—I am sure that he would be very welcome—to see at first hand the pressures it faces and what can be done to improve the situation for the hospital and its patients.

Finally, I wish to reiterate my thanks to the dedicated doctors, nurses and staff across the hospital for their tireless work, day and night, in these very challenging circumstances.

24/01/2020
Robert Jenrick – 2020 Statement on the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 Report

Below is the text of the statement made by Robert Jenrick, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, in the House of Commons on 21 January 2020.

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 1 Report.

It is now over two and a half years since the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower, and I believe I speak for all Members of this House when I say that we once again offer the 72 victims, the bereaved, the survivors and everyone affected our profound condolences. They remain in our thoughts and prayers. They seek answers, accountability, justice and action to ensure that this terrible tragedy is never repeated. That is why yesterday I set out our immediate plans to improve building safety in this country. Getting this right is a priority for this new Government and the Prime Minister, and it is something that I will personally be taking forward at pace.

Dame Margaret Hodge (Barking) (Lab)

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way so early in his speech. He refers to the statement he made yesterday. I welcome the decision in that statement to consult on ensuring that building regulations are relevant to buildings of a lower height, but he talked about that being relevant to new buildings and not to existing buildings. He will know from the fire at Samuel Garside House in my constituency that that was an existing building, and that it went up in just six minutes. If the fire had happened in the middle of night, it could have led to huge loss of life. Fortunately it did not, but I ask him to consider whether the regulations should not also be relevant to existing buildings, as well as to new buildings of a lower height.

Robert Jenrick

I will come to that issue in a moment. The right hon. Lady and I have worked together on this and she has been a strong advocate for her constituents after the fire in Barking.

The announcement we made yesterday goes further. It says that we will be working with experts to develop a far more sophisticated measure of safety in buildings than simply the crude one of height alone that has existed for decades in this country. Once we have arrived at that, it will inform all the actions that building owners will have to take. It is the responsibility of building owners to take a view of building safety through an independent assessment of risk in that building that bears in mind all the characteristics of the building, whether it be the height, the residents in the building, the fire safety system or—as with the fire in Barking—balconies and other materials that are used on the building.

Lucy Powell (Manchester Central) (Lab/Co-op) rose—

Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab) rose—

Bob Seely (Isle of Wight) (Con) rose—

Robert Jenrick

If I could perhaps make some progress, I will come to the points around building safety in a moment and return to the hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell).

As I have said, getting this right will be a priority for the Government, for the Prime Minister and for myself. We will be introducing two Bills: one to deal with the immediate fire safety issues that we have identified, and another that will bring in the biggest change to building regulations in almost 40 years. Having met families of the bereaved and survivors, some of whom join us in the Gallery today, I remain acutely aware of our responsibility to ensure that they continue to receive the support they need and to see the change that they rightly demand. They have shown incredible resilience and acted not just with great dignity but with great courage. Their voices are being heard, and they must continue to be. On 30 October last year I stood in the House with the Prime Minister following the publication of the Grenfell inquiry’s phase 1 report, which covered the events of the night. Our immediate response was to accept in principle all the findings of the report that relate to the Government. Since then, we have worked at pace to deliver the Government’s response, which I am setting out today.

Sir Martin’s report provides a detailed, minute-by-minute account of what happened on the evening of 14 June 2017. It is built around the testimony of survivors and of the fire and rescue team involved in the response. The report made very important recommendations, including new duties for building owners; operational changes for the London Fire Brigade and, indeed, for fire and rescue services more widely, as well as for emergency services across the country; and addressing the continued presence of unsafe cladding on buildings.

Michael Tomlinson (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (Con)

Will the Secretary of State give way?

Robert Jenrick

If I may, I will come to my hon. Friend in a moment.

I will now turn to the actions the Government have taken since receiving the report. First, in response to Sir Martin’s findings that there was compelling evidence that the external walls on Grenfell Tower were not compliant with building regulations—this was an important finding—we are wasting no time in addressing this. The Home Office will introduce the fire safety Bill in the coming weeks so that the necessary changes are made as soon as possible. This Bill will leave building owners in no doubt that external wall systems, including cladding, and front doors to individual flats in multi-occupied residential buildings fall within the scope of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. This means that they must assess the risk and they must take precautionary measures to keep people safe. The fire safety Bill will also make clear the enforcement powers that can be taken locally against building owners who have not remediated unsafe ACM—aluminium composite material— cladding. This Bill will be the first step towards the new regulatory framework that will implement the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower inquiry phase 1 and the regulatory requirements to do so.

Lucy Powell

I thank the Secretary of State for the tone in which he is conducting this debate, and indeed in which he has been leading on these issues since he took over. Could he clarify whether this new body will mean that residents such as mine in Skyline Central 1, who are facing £25,000 bills each being passed on by the building owner, can have recourse back to the building owner, who would have to meet the cost of their now unsafe building?

Robert Jenrick

That will depend on the exact legal relationship in the building in question, and I am very happy to work with the hon. Lady to help investigate that. It is the responsibility of building owners to take action and, as she rightly mentions, many have for various reasons passed that on to leaseholders. I am acutely aware, as I said in the House yesterday, that some leaseholders feel trapped and unable to fund the mediation works that now need to happen, and that costs should not be a bar to that. As I said yesterday, we are now working with the Treasury to see if there are ways of providing financing to support those individuals.

Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)

I thank the Secretary of State for being generous with his time. On that very point, he mentions having conversations with the Treasury to look at different options—he said this in his statement yesterday—but is there any set timeline for the conversations that he will have with the Treasury on this point? I ask, because leaseholders have been in this position for two years and seven months, so the sooner we can resolve how to support them so that they do not to have to front the costs of any remediation works, the better. What is the timeline that he has with the Treasury to ensure that this can be sped up, because it has been over two years?

Robert Jenrick

I cannot give the hon. Lady an exact timetable, but it is worth saying that we have already—I will come on to this in my remarks—made available £600 million for building owners in both the social sector and the private sector. On expert advice, I have targeted that public grant funding towards ACM-clad buildings of over 18 metres. I will say again that all of the expert opinion I have seen has confirmed the decision that those are the most unsafe buildings and that they should be the priority for public funding. A number of building owners are already helping to remove cladding in their own buildings, and coming up with funding arrangements to help leaseholders to meet those costs, such as low-cost or zero-interest loan schemes. If the Government can assist in that, I think we should do so, because we want to see this cladding removed as soon as possible.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)

May I slightly extend that point, as these issues reach across the Floor? Since the terrible Grenfell disaster, people in a privately owned block of flats in my constituency have faced massively increased insurance costs. They have been unable to get anyone to give them a confirmed view about the cladding, or to receive information from the fire brigade about the real nature of the threat and danger. Everybody has run for cover, and as result those people have already spent a vast amount of money—they are not wealthy people. They have now been told that the cladding does not pose a threat, but they have a backwash of costs and are still affected by this issue. Will the Secretary of State consider whether insurance companies, and others, should have been charging leaseholders those extra costs until it had been confirmed that there was a real threat?

Robert Jenrick

I would be happy to take up the individual case raised by my right hon. Friend, and the wider point. We are working closely with the insurance industry. This issue involves a range of materials, the most dangerous of which is ACM cladding, which was on Grenfell Tower. That has been the focus of public money. It is the responsibility of all building owners to have an independent assessment and ensure that the building is safe—it sounds as if that is what happened, perhaps belatedly, to the building in my right hon. Friend’s constituency. That assessment should provide the answers, after which remediation work, if necessary, needs to happen at pace. If I can help to support that in any way, I will.

Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)

This inquiry is not about finding blame; it is about finding causes and rectifying the situation. In this case, the problems that have been created regarding the wider building stock and liability are no fault of property owners, tenants or leaseholders, and that leaves a liability that falls on the Government, at least to a degree. Otherwise, there will be widening injustice, bankruptcy and failures across a whole sector of housing, because we are trying to remediate the failure of regulation in the past.

Robert Jenrick

The question at the heart of my hon. Friend’s remarks is what the judge will determine in the second phase of the inquiry. What went wrong that led to that cladding being on Grenfell Tower? Was it a failure of Government or of regulation of the construction industry, or a combination of those things? I do not think we can prejudge what the judge will determine over the course of the detailed second phase of the inquiry that is about to commence.

Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)

I have followed these matters over the past couple of years, and in my experience the Secretary of State has done more to try to resolve these problems than any of his predecessors, all of whom tried to tackle a thorny issue. He is right to say that ACM is probably the most dangerous cladding, and we should deal with that first. Advice Note 14 does not deal with ACM, but it does effectively say that other combustible materials should not be on the outside of high rise buildings. The official guidance was more equivocal than that, which leaves long leaseholders in a difficult situation with unsaleable properties—I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests in that regard. We must consider this issue. Yesterday the Secretary of State said that he would look at doing more, and we will need to.

Robert Jenrick

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend who is a long-standing campaigner on this issue. Next month we will publish the final result of the testing process that my Department has been undertaking over many months with the Building Research Establishment. That will lay out for all to see evidence that I have already seen about the safety, or otherwise, of a range of different materials. I believe it will demonstrate that ACM is by far the most concerning material and should come off buildings as quickly as possible.

Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)

Will the Secretary of State give way?

Robert Jenrick

I had better make some progress, but I will return to my hon. Friend in a moment.

The Bill we will bring forward later this year will be the first step towards the new regulatory framework that will implement the recommendations of the phase 1 report’s legislative requirements. Under the Bill, building owners and managers will be required to share information with fire and rescue services on external wall systems, and undertake regular inspections of flat entrance doors. The Home Office will consult on the detail of the proposals in spring this year.

That legislative action will address many of the inquiry’s recommendations and forms part of the wider Government response to ensure that action is taken against unsafe cladding. My Department has already introduced a ban on combustible materials on the external walls of new buildings over 18 metres, and, as I have said, made available £600 million in Government funding to support that work.

Sir Martin’s report concluded that it was not just the materials of the building that contributed to the tragedy: more people could have survived the fire had the London Fire Brigade conducted a full evacuation earlier in the night. He recognises existing Government guidance stating that fire and rescue services should have contingency plans for when a building needs full or partial evacuation, and noted that the London Fire Brigade policies were in this respect deficient.

Andy Slaughter

In the Minister’s statement yesterday there was not anything that I saw about evacuation and changes to the stay-put policy, which would be a huge change that would have implications for means of escape, alarms, sprinkler systems and so on. When can we expect the Government to pronounce on that?

Robert Jenrick

I will come on to that point in just a moment, if I may.

Sir Martin recommended that the Government produce national guidelines for carrying out the evacuation of high rise residential buildings. I am now working closely with colleagues in the Home Office on those guidelines. My Department and the Home Office have formed a steering group with the National Fire Chiefs Council and other experts, which met for the first time in December. The group agreed on the scope of an evidence review into stay put and evacuation. Let me reiterate, however, that the advice from the National Fire Chiefs Council is that stay put remains an appropriate policy providing compartmentation is maintained. In fact, Sir Martin highlighted that effective compartmentation is likely to remain at the heart of fire safety and the response to fires in high rise buildings. I think that that is an important point that we should all bear in mind in how we communicate on these issues to members of the public.

A number of recommendations made by Sir Martin were for the London Fire Brigade, and for fire and rescue services more widely across the country. The firefighters serving that night showed exceptional bravery and dedication. I would like to pay tribute to their courage, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister did last year. However, the report made very clear that there were failures in the London Fire Brigade’s response. Significant changes are needed in its policies, guidance and training, including on evacuation procedures. We know that fire and rescue services across the country need to have the training and processes in place to be able to respond as effectively as possible to fires in residential buildings. The control rooms that co-ordinate emergency responses must have the processes in place to deal with all incidents effectively.

I am pleased that London Fire Brigade has already rolled out fire survival guidance training, and is reviewing its policies and guidance in the light of the inquiry’s recommendations. It is important that all our emergency services have proper protocols in place to ensure that they can work together and communicate effectively in an emergency. The Home Office is working with the interoperability board to ensure that those lessons are learned. While these recommendations are not aimed directly at the Government, clearly the Government have a role and we will not sit back.

Mrs Theresa May (Maidenhead) (Con)

I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. As Home Secretary I chaired the board of JESIP, the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Programme. What is clear from Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s report, page 698, is that the protocol was not followed on the night of the Grenfell fire. He recommends changes to that protocol. Have the changes been put in place? Equally important, have frontline officers and staff of the three emergency services had the changes drawn to their attention, so that they know what they must do when they are working together in a major incident?

Robert Jenrick

My right hon. Friend makes a series of extremely important points. Those issues have been brought to the attention of all the emergency services; they are now working through them. The Home Office is helping to co-ordinate that work and, like her, I hope that those lessons are learned as quickly as possible so that if we are ever presented with a tragedy on this scale again all the emergency services can work together as one, in a co-ordinated way.

Fire and rescue services need urgently to address these issues and must set out their plans to do so. There have been some welcome developments, including, for example, that the London Fire Brigade now carries smoke hoods on its fire engines; that five pumps and a drone, rather than four pumps, are now deployed to fires in high-rise buildings; and that the London Fire Brigade has already taken steps to ensure that personnel understand the risk of fire taking hold in external wall systems. My hon. Friend the Minister for Crime, Policing and the Fire Service will address the House at the end of the debate on the work he is doing with the sector.

The work I have outlined shows the urgency with which we are addressing Sir Martin’s recommendations. The Government did not wait for the phase 1 report to begin addressing the most pressing building safety issues. We took immediate action in the aftermath of the fire with a comprehensive and independent review of building safety, chaired by Dame Judith Hackitt.

Bob Seely

It seems to me that ACM cladding, which my right hon. Friend addressed earlier, goes to the heart of the matter. How many high-rise buildings with unsafe ACM cladding have been identified and have had remedial treatment? How many others does he think still have to be identified, and what steps is he taking to do so?

Robert Jenrick

We are working very closely with the social sector and private owners. I am afraid that, frustratingly, progress has been extremely slow, as my hon. Friend and others across the House know. The fund that we opened for the taxpayer to pay for the remediation has so far seen only four successful applications. However, there is evidence that progress is moving at a pace that we have not seen before. There are now only 10 buildings in the private sector that have not begun the process of remediating, which means drawing up a plan and beginning with or contracting workers who can come on site and take away the cladding. There are exceptional circumstances with all those 10 buildings because, unfortunately, they have been identified only recently as having ACM cladding, so they have come to the process only over the course of the autumn. I want that work to proceed at a pace that we have not known before. As I said yesterday, we are now commissioning an independent building safety construction expert to advise my Department on how we can get that moving very quickly.

It was clear to me when I became Secretary of State—this was confirmed by Sir Martin’s report—that we need to go further to bring forward a series of very significant reforms and ensure that the work moves at pace. In response to Dame Judith Hackitt’s report, we are creating, immediately, the new building safety regulator. As I announced yesterday, we have chosen that that will be established within the Health and Safety Executive. The new regulator will raise building safety and performance standards. It will oversee a new and more stringent regime for high rise buildings and for higher risk buildings more generally.

Non-compliance is an issue in the industry, and the building safety legislation announced in the Queen’s Speech will ensure that the new regulator has the appropriate powers to sanction those responsible. This is a new and significantly tougher regime, underpinned by improved enforcement, dedicated to ensuring that our buildings are made with the necessary high safety standards and that the people within them always feel safe.

Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)

My right hon. Friend refers to people who suffered from the fire. Can he confirm how many of those families are still waiting for permanent housing? If there are any, what is he doing to find them a permanent home speedily?

Robert Jenrick

Of the households who lived in Grenfell tower, 10 are yet to move into permanent accommodation. Of them, one is in hotel accommodation; the others are in high-quality temporary accommodation. Without going into the personal details of each household, which would not be appropriate, I can tell the House that I have personally reviewed the circumstances behind each of them, and my right hon. Friend the Housing Minister and I have worked closely with Kensington Council to review them again several times since coming to office. They are complex cases with a range of individual circumstances behind them, but we are hopeful that many of them will move into accommodation in which they feel comfortable as soon as possible.

Yesterday, I announced a series of new measures, including the appointment of a construction expert, to quicken the pace of the remediation of ACM cladding. I announced that I was minded to lower the height requirements for sprinklers in residential buildings from 18 metres to 11 metres, and I will set out a full proposal on how we intend to deliver that in February.

As I have stated, I have had the privilege of meeting survivors and their families and friends as well as people from across the community of north Kensington, and from the schools, such as Kensington Aldridge Academy and St Francis of Assisi Catholic Primary School, that provide a safe and caring space for children affected by the tragedy to reflect and remember their loved ones, to the worshippers at the Al-Manaar north Kensington mosque, who came together to support the community after the fire and continue to do so. One thing has been clear to me: this is a community of people who look after one another, who will continue to support one another and who will never forget what happened on the evening of the fire.

We owe it to them to ensure that their views are heard throughout our work, that justice is delivered and that the system is changed so that such a tragic fire can never happen again. That means reforming our building safety regime, but it also means reform of social housing to ensure tenants’ voices are heard and that their landlords provide good-quality, safe accommodation with strong and robust sanctions in place to hold them to account where that does not happen.

The Prime Minister and I have committed to bringing forward a social housing White Paper. This will set out further measures to empower tenants, hold social landlords to account and support the continued supply of social housing. This will include measures to provide for greater redress and better regulation and to improve the quality and safety of social housing.

Lucy Powell

Most people would welcome the White Paper the Secretary of State has just announced, but will he consider extending it to those living in private blocks? Many more people are now living in high rise blocks in city centres such as mine, but leaseholders have no rights against the building owners and very little recourse, and there is no teeth when the leasehold valuation tribunal or any other body finds in their favour. The need of private tenants and leaseholders for recourse is just as great.

Robert Jenrick

The hon. Lady makes several important points. Much of the work of the social housing White Paper will apply to private leaseholders, and of course we have a separate stream of work on reforming leasehold. We have already said we will shortly publish a draft Bill on leasehold reform, and we await the further reports from the Law Commission and then in time from the Competition and Markets Authority on leasehold, which will inform our work and I hope lead to significant legislation to reform the leasehold market later in this Parliament.

Dame Margaret Hodge

I am extremely grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way again. As he will remember, one of the issues that arose from the fire in Barking was the fact that none of the leaseholders had household insurance, so when they lost all the contents of their homes or the contents were damaged they had no recourse to insurance to replace them. Is he giving any consideration, in any of these reforms, to introducing a system whereby not only is building insurance imposed on leaseholders—presumably in social housing that would be covered by the local authorities—but victims of fires do not end up losing all their belongings and having no money with which to replace them? These are people on the edge who really are finding it hard to manage.

Robert Jenrick

I did look into that issue when the right hon. Lady raised it after the fire in Barking. I am acutely aware of the number of individuals who do not have household insurance—that was brought home to me after the floods in Doncaster last year, when we encountered many households that did not have it. I do not think that it is for the state to intervene—I am not sure how practical it would be for household insurance to be provided centrally, regardless of the value of the contents of individuals’ homes—but I am happy to think again, and to speak to the right hon. Lady if that would be helpful.

My Department continues to hold regular meetings with the crucial stakeholders, including Grenfell United, to discuss our emerging proposals, and to ensure that the reform we are introducing is what is needed to deliver meaningful change. I am grateful for their engagement and commitment. It was at their request that we did not rush to publish the social housing White Paper, but are continuing to work with them to ensure that they will—I hope—be able to support it in due course. I will report back to the House shortly with our conclusions.

We know that for the families, the relatives and the survivors, change cannot come quickly enough, and we know that there is still a huge amount to do. We have heard that already, in the opening of this debate. The recent fire in Barking and the fire in Bolton at the end of last year only serve to remind us of the urgency with which we must act, and will continue to guide our work.

Phase 1 of the inquiry was just the first part of a complex process to uncover the truth of what happened. Next week, phase 2 hearings will begin as the work of the inquiry continues. Those hearings will help us to understand how the building was so dangerously exposed to the risk of fire. I have no doubt that Sir Martin will leave no stone unturned in his work. There will be tough questions for those involved in the refurbishment of the tower, and for the manufacturers of the materials used; but there will also be questions for central and local government to respond to, and I will support the work of the inquiry in any way I can.

We also continue to work alongside others to bring about changes that will protect the public, and I will ensure that further updates on the steps taken to implement the chairman’s recommendations are shared with the House at the earliest opportunity.

Paul Scully (Sutton and Cheam) (Con)

As has already been noted, a number of survivors and families from Grenfell are present today. They will be looking for leadership from both their local council and this place. Can the Secretary of State reassure us that he will continue to speak to all the people and organisations involved in the north Kensington area?

Robert Jenrick

I will certainly make that commitment to the bereaved, to the survivors, and to the community of north Kensington. I have met a number of those groups on a number of occasions since becoming Secretary of State, and last week my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I met a group of survivors, bereaved people, local residents and members of the community.

I think that I speak for the whole House in once again offering the bereaved and the survivors our most profound condolences. Their pain and loss were unimaginable to us. We owe it to them, and to all whose lives have been affected by the fire at Grenfell Tower, to match these sentiments with action, on a scale and at a pace commensurate with the tragedy, and to do everything in our power to ensure that this never happens again.

24/01/2020
Foreign and Commonwealth Office – 2020 Press Release on Governor Dakin’s Speech

Below is a press release issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 22/01/2020.

His Excellency the Governor, Nigel Dakin, addressed the audience during the official launch of the Turks & Caicos Islands National Security Strategy on 22 January 2020.

TCI now, for the first time, has a National Security Strategy. The need for TCI to have this was driven by the Premier and it became one of my first priorities, on arrival, to help her deliver it.

It sat very well with my own initial priorities, outlined in my inauguration speech, around crime, illegal immigration and hurricane preparedness.

The most important line in the strategy we launch today is the last sentence of the introduction “In terms of the leadership needed to tackle National Security challenges the Premier’s and the Governor’s Office stand together”. When it comes to the specifics of crime and policing, because national security is much more than crime, we also bring the Commissioner into this top team.

In these three roles we combine all the powers we need: funding through taxing and spending; democratic accountability; decisions around operational deployment; executive and emergency powers if needed; and the ability to reach beyond our own borders. If we were pulling against each other, or even working in parallel rather than together, none of us could deliver in the way the country rightly demands. But that’s explicitly not the case.

All that I’m about to say would not have been possible without the Strategy we launch today – and the thinking that went onto it. The institutions that flow from it, help consolidate this ‘top team relationship’ so it’s not personality dependent, but the way Government functions in the future to look after the safety and security of its people.

With one team at the top, we intend to create a ‘one government team’ around us to deal with these issues. The team you see with us today are among the top thirty officials in TCI Government and Policing that will execute the strategy. We are also grateful to be joined – as not disinterested observers – by the Commissioner of Montserrat, the Deputy Commissioner from Cayman and the Assistant Commissioner from Bermuda. We are strengthened by your presence Gentlemen.

All of us are presently involved in a one week training exercise run by the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst but we have taken an hour out of that course to be with you today. We are in a classroom learning – you are never too old to learn – and in learning, as much from each other – we are coming together as a team, sharing experiences, forming, storming and norming around one shared endeavour: to make this country safer.

All in this room agree that the fact this country is small should be our strength in terms of national security. Our communication and co-operation across Government should be straightforward. We should be agile. We should be efficient. But let’s be frank with each other, we are presently none of these things – so this week is important, indeed vital, in that process of change.

A public version of the strategy will be published but I suspect the public are interested today, not in what’s written on paper, but what’s happening as a result of the Strategy in the real world. That’s what I intend to focus on. First, once you have the right strategy, you then need the right structures and the people with the right skills to implement it. So that’s where I start:

an already established National Security Council has been reimagined that can develop national capability and work at the strategic level and tackle wicked problems. That change has now occurred we are feeling the benefits. Bringing experts into the room, as required, has helped

since September a UK funded security advisor has been in place to help drive strategic change. The Premier and myself, and I suspect all who have come into contact with her, want to pay public tribute to Victoria for her detailed planning work. Much of what I’m about to describe, she has been instrumental in

I can announce today that a TCIG National Security Advisor (modelled on the role of the NSA in the UK) has been appointed who will work to both the Governor and Premier. This is a significant step forward in both tying together Government but also vesting more responsibility in Turks Islanders to manage national security. This will be Tito Lightbourne who will become the first Permanent Secretary National Security. This role will allow him to work across Government Departments with the authority of the Governor and Premier and he will co-ordinate to ensure proper cross-government working on National Security issues while being the focus for building long term national security capability.

at the same time I can announce the promotion and appointment of two new Permanent Secretaries into the key Ministries involved in National Security. Mr Desmond Wilson will take over as PS Border Control and brings considerable experience with him as the former Director of Immigration. He also has a well-deserved reputation for action and delivery; qualities I admire

Ms Althea Been who moves from being a Deputy Secretary in Border Control, and will therefore be taking useful context about the challenges of that area of national security, will start as PS at Home Affairs on the 1st April. She also has a reputation for proactivity and delivery and that reassures us that she will be a first class member of the top team vital, for example, in redeveloping the Prison and all matters linked to that institution

funding of a National Security Secretariat, working to Tito Lightbourne has been agreed. The threats outlined in the Strategy will be managed by two senior ‘Threat Leads’ in the Secretariat; crucially that includes our resilience to, and recovery from, disasters. Placing that issue in the centre of Government, rather than on the side, is an important shift of emphasis

when we combine this NSA and Secretariat with the strong command and control function the Police have now developed at the operational level we will have a well-drilled national command structure for use in times of crisis at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. We will be rehearsing and refining this capability during the year

in terms of new and significant national capability we are in close touch with the UK Ministry of Defence, as you know we intend to generate a Turks and Caicos Regiment – our own Defence Force. We expect to be asking for expressions of interest for the Regiment’s first Commanding Officer within weeks, followed by advertising for its regular Officer cadre shortly thereafter, before starting to recruit the ‘Reserve Force’ in the summer

Looking further down into the strategy, I intend to use my remaining time today, to look at the two issues that are at the top of the public’s agenda: Illegal Immigration and separately, because it’s intellectually lazy to conflate the two, Serious Crime

But before I do that I want to emphasise that the most pressing threat to our National Security – over a period of decades – is going to be natural disaster. The seas around us are warming. They provide the fuel for hurricanes, and we are in their path. You’ll see in the strategy it’s in the top two we must tackle – we have to move from a position where we focus on ‘recovery’ to one where much more effort is placed on ‘resilience’. Countries in the Caribbean that don’t, will go into perpetual decline, unable to recover properly between each natural disaster.

Worth also putting on record that, other than Natural Disaster, Illegal Immigration and Serious Crime, the other six issues the Strategy calls out as threats are: critical national infrastructure failure; serious public disorder; maritime sovereignty; food security and scarcity; cyber and, finally; terrorism, money laundering and financing of terrorism. Before moving onto crime let me start with what we are doing to reverse the seriously destabilising impact illegal immigration has on our society.

without getting ahead of ourselves we now have the start of a good story to tell in terms of the interdiction of the traditional large sloops. I said shortly after my arrival in July that I intended to learn from failure and be accountable. We’ve studied trends, both success and failures. While ten landed in the first half of the year, from 30th August, only one large vessel has got through – and even then a number, although not all, of its illegal passengers were arrested once they made land fall

the team we have on the front line protecting our maritime borders – led by Ennis Grant, Everet Warrican, Tito Forbes and Rodman Johnson are, to my mind, heroic. As a team we’ve been testing, adjusting and learning. Staffing at the radar has been increased, more efficient deployment of Maritime assets has been established and better cross-government working introduced

there’s much more to do and a virtual team that pulls together the Maritime Branch, Radar and Immigration Task Force has started to take root. Linking them to the US Coastguard and Bahamian Defence Force in a wider international team, a game changer. And at this point I pay great tribute to our international partners. This is essential because we cannot be complacent: as we improve so do our opponents – Darwinian like – they evolve. We have to adapt our ways of working and capabilities rapidly; we are now starting to have the team work in place to make that happen.

but stopping the sloops is attacking the symptom not the cause. The big change the Strategy calls out is the need to go after the under-pinning business model: prosecuting those, in TCI, and overseas if we can reach them, profiting from this trade in human cargo. To that end a significant investigation into people trafficking – led by the Police and drawing on contracted UK Police Officers – has commenced. This large investigation is working in tandem with Canadian, US and UK law enforcement. The recent arrest of 29 Sri Lankans – and congratulations to all involved in that particular success – has allowed us to look through an investigative keyhole at a global people trafficking ring. With international partners we intend to exploit that opportunity

with this ambition in mind – going after those profiting from the trade rather than just those trafficked – our intention is to build a secure and vetted capability on the Islands that can better collect, assess and then take action on intelligence we generate – or which is generated by our partners. Like the Defence Force, the UK are looking to support us in this and this will have strategic impact on all aspects of national security and serious crime

significant funding from Government to upgrade the radar has also been secured. Our intention is to make detection so likely we disincentivise travel across dangerous waters. As it is, 15 Haitians lost their lives in the waters off West Caicos last year, we assume many more in open seas. We mourn their and their family’s loss while equally holding those who trafficked them, exploited them and profited from them, with contempt. They are now the targets of our criminal justice system

very significantly – because great efficiency and effectiveness can be delivered if we get this right – programmatic work has begun to establish a Border Force probably with different combined land and combined sea elements. The Premier has been keen on this type of reorganisation from the beginning and she was right to be so

funds have been secured to retrofit a seized fast vessel to strengthen the Maritime Branch that will be deployed on Grand Turk (seriously extending range)

work has also begun with the US Coast Guard and the Bahamian Defence Force to significantly strengthen tri-lateral and bi-lateral co-operation. Lawyers are now involved in drafting future agreements. There has anyway been an immediate uptick in co-operation – some of that has been already described in the media – and we have been clear with all international parties that they shouldn’t underestimate TCI’s ambition. Our aim is to be a serious partner and player in the region

in terms of energy we have initially focussed on stemming the maritime threat, so we are excited by the appointment of Desmond Wilson who, drawing on guidance from his Minister (who of course is part of the NSC) can use the convening power provided by the PS National Security and deliver a proportionate whole of Government approach, to tackling Illegal Immigration through arresting those who overstay, or who entered illegally. There’s a critical balance we must get right here in not alienating those who have every right to be here

And now to crime:

Crime is rightly the hot topic so I will dwell on what, as Governor, Premier and Commissioner, we are doing to make a change. It’s important though to recognise that while the Police take the burden of public scrutiny, Policing on its own isn’t the answer. If you will indulge me to be clear, to the point of bluntness – the answer to the problem we are trying to solve won’t be reached until future public co-operation is in line with present public outrage

Policing by consent, which is our Policing model, can’t succeed without public trust and public engagement. Policing can do far better on this – and recognising this fact is an important first step – so we now have a structured approach to delivering that change. But the public must meet us half way and if they don’t, the investments we are making will fail. It’s that important. In some ways it’s that fragile

An increase in overall Police numbers by 20% has begun, recruits have started training and the overall uplift will be complete by March 2021. The Commissioner tells us this increase will be a game changer; we can reinforce the very capable Tactical Unit, the Maritime Unit and crucially bring in proper Community Policing where the community gets to know their local officer through regular engagement

We already have 8 officers training in Barbados. The recruitment of a further 20 – also recruited from inside TCI – has been completed on schedule and they will train in the Bahamas. Recruiting the next tranche of 20 is due to begin which will include bringing in experienced overseas officers who can immediately reinforce our Tactical and Maritime Unit.

Further recruitment can be fine-tuned dependent on need.

As well as recruiting we must train existing staff – not least in terms of building a relationship with the public; our officers have been underinvested in for years. Funds for a significant uplift in Police Training have been agreed.

A gun crime unit has been established and this has started to yield results. More guns were recovered in the two months before Christmas than in the previous two years.

The use of a UK police officer, on island as part of the SIPT trial, but hugely experienced in murder investigations, has now been commissioned to review all murder cases. UK Police will review professional standards of conduct and performance in our Police force and separately review the structures and organisation of the Police’s approach to homicide and will then remain in country to mentor. The Commissioner has other initiatives he is working on drawing on UK policing experience that we are not yet in a position to announce, but which will make an impact to the long term strength and health of the Force.

Outside of the National Security Strategy, but crucial to its success, the last Chief Justice, independently, pulled together the Justice sector (Judges, Chief Magistrate, AG, DPP, Commissioner, Prison Superintendent, Social Welfare, UK Justice Advisor) into a committee that could drive positive change in the overall Justice system. Cabinet has now been presented with a plan as to how Government can support much needed change in all aspects of justice other than Policing. This includes the like of Prison reform, parole, rehabilitation, the efficiency of the system in delivering justice and the physical environment in which justice is delivered.

You will note from what I haven’t said – and this is explicit in the Strategy – that we stay top level and we deliberately do not seek to drop down into operational policing decisions around the deployment of officers and the like. It’s important that these decisions are the Commissioners, with his excellent Force Executive, so he can maintain operational independence. What the strategy seeks to do is give him the resources, connectivity to both other parts of Government and overseas, and the context in which the Force can succeed

Conclusion

I have spent previous press conferences expressing my heartfelt thoughts about the impact of crime. We rightly focus on murder but the truth is all crime corrodes our society and damages our people. Even new to these Islands I’d met the young man who had been simply introduced to me as ‘Spooky’, the DJ at the basketball games I attend.

And I’d met a previous victim of murder, Jeffrey, and thought what a convivial and engaging bar tender he was and what a great young father he must be. This is a small society where murder feels close because it is close. Not only do families grieve, but with each murder the country grieves.

The most important thing I can do to honour their short lives, the most important thing we can do in this room is recognise we all have personal agency in this endeavour.

If you judge we are serious, the greatest thing you can do to honour those who have become victims is become equally serious yourself in playing your part. Many I know already feel this way. We need people actively building an ever healthier society, in whatever way they can, using whatever talent is at their disposal.

I’m not going to appeal for information (others better placed than me can do that, although I’d note it’s the greatest contribution some could make) but I am – unapologetically – going to ask for national solidarity, for national unity, when it comes to national security.

I’ve been particularly grateful to the Leader of the Opposition for his thoughtful, measured and constructive advice, to me personally and in a more formal consultation, as we have developed this. As a national leader, but also as an ex-Police Officer, his instincts have not only been important but genuinely valuable. To the rest of you I say, given we can find so many ways to divide ourselves, this isn’t one of the issues on which we need to seek division and we achieve great collective strength if we don’t.

So I end with one of my favourite quotes, not biblical in this instance, but from Sun Tzu – one of history’s great military philosophers: “Strategy without tactics” he wrote “is the slowest route to victory”. “Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”

TCI now has a strategy. Within it, I’ve just described some of the tactics we are already employing and capability we are building. I, the Premier, the Commissioner and all those in this room, representing every branch of Government involved in this shared enterprise, are committed to delivering a safe environment. I hope you can, in your own way, feel part of this because in truth you – the public – are without doubt our greatest national security asset. Extrapolating slightly from the Sun Tzu quote: national unity, around national security, would be the fastest route to success.

And with that, may God Bless these Turks and Caicos Islands.

23/01/2020
Foreign and Commonwealth Office – 2020 Press Release on Peace for Israelis and Palestinians

Below is a press release issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 22/01/2020.

Statement by Ambassador Karen Pierce, UK Permanent Representative to the UN at the United Nations Security Council Open Debate on the Middle East.

Thank you Mr President. Before I start, I just want to pick up on what both the American and the German Ambassador said about the Holocaust commemoration, which takes place this year – a very important commemoration – and the fact that some of us will be joining the Secretary-General at the weekend in New York to commemorate this important anniversary.

Mr President, turning to the Open Debate;

The year 2020 opened with a new crisis in the Middle East, following the killing of Qasem Soleimani, in response to strikes by Iraqi militias against coalition bases, and the downing of Ukrainian Airlines flight 752. The United Kingdom continues to urge all parties to de-escalate following the events and for Iran to take the opportunity to come in from the cold and pursue its legitimate interests in the region peacefully, with full respect for international rules.

I’d like to echo what German representative said about recognition of Israel in this context.

Mr President, as demonstrated by the briefings we’ve heard today, it’s right that this Council also remains engaged to resolve one of the longest standing conflicts on its agenda, the Israeli Palestinian conflict. We have made clear our concern that the situation on the ground, which, as the Secretary-General noted in his assessment last month, has deteriorated over the last three years. And the figures that the Under-Secretary-General quoted are troubling and compelling.

All sides have a responsibility to arrest this deterioration and to create an atmosphere more conducive to peace. For Israel, this means:

(i) An immediate halt to settlement expansion. We condemn the Israeli government’s advancement this month of yet more plans, for over 1,900 housing units across the West Bank. It is the UK’s longstanding position that settlements are illegal under international law and undermine the viability of the two-state solution.

(ii) The avoidance of any suggestion that parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territories should be annexed. Such a move would be contrary to international law, damaging to peace efforts and could not pass unchallenged.

(iii) An immediate end to the demolition of Palestinian-owned homes and structures, as well as the eviction of Palestinians from their homes. The targeting of donor-funded structures in Area C is of particular concern. We call on the Israeli authorities to provide a clear, transparent route to construction for Palestinians in Area C.

Turning to Palestinians’ responsibilities:

(i) We unreservedly condemn the indiscriminate attacks against Israeli civilians by groups such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Such attacks are completely unacceptable, a violation of international law, and need to cease immediately.

(ii) There should be renewed efforts toward Palestinian reconciliation. We encourage those involved in the reconciliation process to allow the Palestinian Authority to fully resume its government functions in Gaza, and ensure compliance with the Quartet Principles.

(iii) We call on the Palestinian Authority to set a date for free and fair elections in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and in Gaza as soon as possible. Genuine democratic national elections for all Palestinians are crucial to the establishment of a viable and sovereign Palestinian State.

Mr President, this Council has a role to play in identifying and containing future flashpoints in conflicts. The resumption of the Great March of Return protests in March is one such possible flashpoint. Hamas operatives have cynically exploited these protests in the past.

Mr President, the United Kingdom’s commitment to Israel’s security is unwavering. Any protests must adhere to the principle of non-violence. We reiterate our longstanding concerns about the manner in which the IDF police non-violent protests, including the use of live ammunition and excessive force, and call on Israel to adhere to the principles of necessity and proportionality.

Turning to the economic and humanitarian situation in Gaza, as we have heard this remains dire. The United Kingdom will provide around $21million in humanitarian assistance to Gaza in 2019/2020. And to help address the underlying causes we are more than tripling our spend on Economic Development programming providing $75m between 2018 and 2023. Ultimately, only peace, stability and the easing of movement and access restrictions will allow necessary investments to be made in a sustainable way.

Mr President, we understand and share the deep frustration on all sides at the lack of progress on the Middle East Peace Process. A just and lasting resolution that ends the occupation and delivers peace for both Israelis and Palestinians is long overdue. We remain committed to achieving a two-State solution, and our long standing position is clear. We support a negotiated settlement recognised by all sides, leading to a safe and secure Israel, living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with agreed land swaps, Jerusalem as a shared capital of both states and a just fair agreed and realistic settlement for refugees. We look forward to working with colleagues to advance our shared objectives of peace and prosperity in the year ahead.

Thank you, Mr President.

23/01/2020
Foreign and Commonwealth Office – 2020 Press Release on Supporting the UN Secretary General’s Priorities

Below is a press release issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 22/01/2020.

Statement by Ambassador Karen Pierce, UK Permanent Representative to the UN at the United Nations General Assembly.

Secretary General, this is a very significant year for the organisation, as many speakers have said. We were honored that the first meetings of the General Assembly and Security Council actually took place in London and are now Queen, then before she became sovereign, attended them. So we feel very close to this anniversary. And I think other speakers are quite right that we need to put the emphasis on what will keep the UN able to discharge its noble functions effectively for the decades to come.

At picking up on what you said, Secretary-General. I think there are three priorities. Firstly, grasping your call to action, using the Decade of Action to realise the SDGs and fulfil the ambitions of the 2030 Agenda. This is actually a last chance for the international community to do this by 2030.

Secondly, we agree with the need to galvanize urgent international action on climate change. And the Italian ambassador already referred to our joint work on COP 26. So we want to get a coherent roadmap, building towards Glasgow, where COP 26 will be held via the UN’s Oceans, Biodiversity and Nature Summits.

And lastly, we want to do more to help the UN uphold the rules-based international system. And I think that means making the UN a safer and more welcoming space for civil society, not allowing narrow interpretations of sovereignty to override genuine concerns about human rights violations and abuses. And I think that also means we need to use the other anniversaries this year, notably the 25th anniversary of Beijing and the 20th anniversary of Resolution 1325 to advance international norms, including on gender equality and sexual and reproductive health rights. As both the Italian and Irish ambassador have said.

My question, Secretary General, would be around girls education. If I may, how can we make progress on this as part of the commitment to gender equality? I think a 131 million girls don’t go to school around the world. We have pledged nearly $700 million to try and get 12 million children into school. But as you can see, that’s only 12 million of more than 100. So your thoughts on that would be welcome.

Thank you.

23/01/2020
Foreign and Commonwealth Office – 2020 Press Release on the Meeting of ASEAN Member States

Below is a press release issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 23/01/2020.

FCO Minister Heather Wheeler held a meeting with senior diplomats from ASEAN countries to discuss strengthening the UK’s partnership with Southeast Asia.

Minister for Asia and the Pacific Heather Wheeler held a meeting today (22 January) with London Ambassadors and High Commissioners of the member states of ASEAN to discuss strengthening the UK’s partnership with the region.

Areas discussed included deepening future UK-ASEAN cooperation and COP 26 and follows the Minister’s visit to Jakarta last week to officially open the UK’s first dedicated Mission to ASEAN.

Speaking after the meeting, FCO Minister for Asia and the Pacific, Heather Wheeler MP said:

“I had the privilege of opening the UK’s first dedicated Mission to ASEAN on my recent visit to Southeast Asia. This meeting with the ASEAN Heads of Mission has been a great chance to strengthen further links with a region which will be a key partner for the UK after we leave the EU at the end of this month.

The UK has longstanding and enriching links with the ASEAN region. Two-way trade in 2018 was £37.2 billion and is ever increasing, over 3 million British nationals visit Southeast Asia each year and there are over 40,000 ASEAN students studying in the UK.

We collaborate on not only education, science and innovation, trade, security and climate, but so many other sectors. The possibilities are endless and continued dialogue will enable us to do even more.”

23/01/2020
Foreign and Commonwealth Office – 2020 Press Release on the ICJ Finding on Myanmar

Below is a press release issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 23/01/2020.

The Minister for Asia and Pacific responds to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision that Myanmar must do more to protect the Rohingya.

Heather Wheeler, Minister for Asia and the Pacific, said:

“We welcome the International Court of Justice’s decision today on provisional measures. The Court was clear that Myanmar must do more to protect the Rohingya.

The Independent Commission of Enquiry’s admission of atrocities and its recommendations are an important first step towards meaningful domestic accountability, though we don’t agree with much of the Commission’s analysis.

We encourage the Government of Myanmar to comply with the provisional measures, which are legally-binding, and implement the Commission’s recommendations.”

23/01/2020
Peter Aldous – 2020 Speech on the Lowestoft Tidal Flood Barrier

Below is the text of the speech made by Peter Aldous, the Conservative MP for Waveney, in the House of Commons on 20 January 2020.

The purpose of this Adjournment debate is to highlight the vital importance of the Lowestoft tidal flood barrier, which will provide much needed protection for many homes and businesses in Lowestoft. Moreover, it will act as a catalyst for inward investment in the offshore wind sector, the post-Brexit fishing industry and the town centre, where the high street is under considerable pressure at present and businesses need reassurance that their investments will not be at risk from flooding.

East Suffolk Council has prepared a flood risk management project, which includes the barrier in the outer harbour. At present, the project is only partially funded and while work will be starting this year, the outstanding money needs to be secured so that the project can be completed in its entirety and it delivers its full benefits to the UK’s most easterly town, which has been exposed to the worst excesses of the North sea for far too long.

It is appropriate that this debate is taking place at the beginning of the Environment Agency’s Flood Action Week. At the outset, I shall provide the national context. It is good news that in the Conservative manifesto at the December election and in the subsequent Queen’s Speech, which we have just concluded debating, the Government have committed an additional £40 billion to flood defences.

The National Infrastructure Commission has highlighted that this investment is badly needed. It points out that over 5 million homes in Britain are at risk of flooding and coastal erosion; management of floods in the past has been short term and reactive, rather than preventive; and while the six-year capital programme to 2020-21 has provided certainty on funding for the issue of floods, there remains no clear long-term objective for flood resilience and defence. It makes a variety of recommendations for how the situation can be improved. First, it proposes a national standard so that by 2050 we can be sure that communities are resilient to flooding for 99.5% of the time whenever feasible.

Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP)

As the hon. Member knows, he is my brother’s Member of Parliament, and this is an issue that affects him. I understand that one of the key questions is whether there are predictions of tidal surge in the area. If there are, how devastating an impact could they have on his constituency, and indeed my brother’s home?

Peter Aldous

I am grateful to the hon. Member for raising that issue; it is one I will come on to. The tidal surge in 2013 gave a clear indication of what could happen in a worst-case scenario and we need to put in place measures to avoid that devastation to people’s lives.

Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

I congratulate the hon. Member on bringing this matter to the House. The Ards peninsula in my constituency has 96 coastal erosion points, so this is happening in my constituency as well, and there is much concern about the erosion, the loss of land, and the impact on homes and livelihoods. Does he agree that the Government must find the money to address these concerns as they are quickly escalating to crisis point—that crisis point being the point of no return?

Peter Aldous

As I will highlight, we must not forget that some coastal areas face devastating flood risk problems too. They might not emerge quite as often as fluvial floods, but their impact on communities is very real. I will highlight the 1953 flood, which is still remembered vividly right along the East Anglian coast.

The second point the National Infrastructure Commission raised was that the existing catchment flood management plans and shoreline management plans should be updated to take into account the commission’s new standards and should set out long-term plans for flood risk management. Thirdly, it argued that currently—at the beginning of 2020—the Government should be putting in place a rolling six-year funding programme in line with the funding profile the commission set out. This would enable the efficient delivery of projects addressing the risks from all sources of flooding. It is vital that when these improvements to the country’s flood defences are made—this comes back to the point the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raised—coastal communities are not overlooked. Storm surges, such as those in 1953 along the East Anglian coast and more recently in 2013, have a terrible impact from which it can take communities a long time to recover—some never do.

Dr Dan Poulter (Central Suffolk and North Ipswich) (Con)

I commend, as always, my hon. Friend’s tremendous advocacy for his constituents, and I am delighted that that was so well reflected in the election result in his constituency. Does he agree that the wider economic damage done by the tidal surges in East Anglia can be felt for many years and have an economic impact on businesses in his constituency, many of which have employees who live in central Suffolk and elsewhere? It is particularly important that the Government take note of this as they seek to support economic growth in and protect the economy of the east of England and Lowestoft.

Peter Aldous

My hon. Friend is right that these storms can have a devastating impact on homeowners and businesses, but that the supply chains of those businesses extend far outside Lowestoft into places such as his constituency.

The 1953 floods caused devastation and loss of life all the way down the east coast—not least in Lowestoft, where the Beach Village, known locally as the Grit, ultimately had to be pulled down and made way for industrial development. Hundreds of families lost not only their homes, but their families’ fishing heritage. The 2013 storm surge, which I shall describe in more detail shortly, thankfully did not have the same impact, primarily because we have better defences than we did 60 years ago, and because we were warned. However, there is a sense in Lowestoft that we “escaped by the skin of our teeth”, and that next time we will not be so lucky.

The needs of coastal communities have been highlighted by the Committee on Climate Change. It has pointed out that coastal communities, infrastructure and landscapes in England are already under considerable pressure from flooding and erosion; that 520,000 properties in England are located in areas that are at risk of damage from coastal flooding; that damages as a result of flooding and erosion amount to an average of more than £260 million per year; and that coastal management around the country is covered by patchwork legislation. In short, we need to do better.

On 5 December 2013, a storm surge caused havoc down the east coast. Lowestoft was one of the worst-affected communities, as I highlighted in another Adjournment debate in the Chamber later that month. In the Lowestoft and Oulton Broad area, 158 residential and 233 commercial properties were flooded, including 90 residential and 143 commercial properties in the low-lying central area of Lowestoft. In addition, tidal flooding resulted in the closure of key transportation links, including Lowestoft railway station, the A47 through Lowestoft and the A12 to the south. Lowestoft was essentially cut off.

The impact on many people and their properties was dramatic. In Levington Court, which provides housing and care for vulnerable older people, 19 flats on the ground floor were evacuated. Residents’ possessions were lost, and they did not return to their homes until several months later. In the nearby Fyffe Centre, which provides accommodation for the homeless, 27 people had to leave. Again, it took many months to refurbish and repair the property.

In adjoining residential areas, including St John’s Road and Marine Parade, many properties were hard hit, including homes in the rental sector. Some people lost all their possessions, which in many cases were not insured. The community rallied round superbly to support them, but full compensation—and I do not mean just financial compensation—can never be provided for the loss of belongings and possessions that can mean so much personally.

Businesses were badly hit, including the Ling’s car showroom, East Coast Cinema—Britain’s most easterly cinema—and Buyaparcel. Wetherspoons’ Joseph Conrad pub in Station Square was badly damaged, and traders in Bevan Street East, close to the town centre, were dealt particularly savage blows. The doctor’s surgery in Marine Parade had to move, and has never returned.

The challenges of rising sea levels and climate change mean that such events will take place more frequently. Sea levels along the Suffolk coast have been rising by 2.4 mm per annum since the 1950s. In Lowestoft, research carried out by Halcrow and BAM Nuttall concluded that a 1953-type flood, which was previously considered to be a one-in-1,000-years event, would now take place every 20 years. There is thus a need to move quickly, and to put proper and full flood defences in place as soon as possible. As climate change continues to drive an increase in severe weather events, significant investment in Lowestoft’s infrastructure is required to provide resilience, to facilitate regeneration plans, and to encourage businesses both to grow and to move into the area.

If—although I should say “when”—we get another storm surge, similar to those of 1953 and 2013, the impact on the town could be profound and far-reaching. Not only could many homes and businesses be badly damaged, but vital infrastructure could, in effect, be taken out. That could include 38 electricity substations, three water-pumping stations, one gas facility, and multiple telecommunications and IT assets.

Transport infrastructure could also be impacted, including Lowestoft railway station again. Up to a mile and a quarter of rail track and signals would be submerged, the bascule bridge across the port could be seriously damaged, and two and a half miles of A roads and 30 miles of minor roads could be affected. In addition, vital community assets would be impacted, including three doctors surgeries, two Government buildings, three community centres and facilities, and up to eight schools and colleges. The results would be devastating and people would quite rightly be very angry, pointing a finger at the council, at the Government and at me, saying, “You had advance warning in 2013, why have you not done anything?”

Actually, since 2013, the council has been proactive. It has acquired temporary barriers that have been deployed on two occasions, when thankfully they were not really tested. It has also been hard at work on preparing a scheme that provides Lowestoft, its residents and businesses with the protection and peace of mind they are entitled to expect. The scheme is oven ready and ready to go, but funding has not yet been obtained for its final phase, the provision of the tidal flood barrier. That gap now needs to be filled.

East Suffolk Council, along with Suffolk County Council, Associated British Ports, the Environment Agency and the New Anglia local enterprise partnership have developed a comprehensive flood protection scheme that brings together tidal, fluvial and pluvial flood risks under one umbrella. The project includes the tidal barrier in the outer harbour to the east of the bascule bridge, with tidal walls to the north and south of the barrier. It also includes separate but equally important work to protect a number of properties that have experienced significant flooding, especially in periods of heavy rainfall, along Kirkley stream, in Aldwyck Way and on Long Road. The project will protect vulnerable parts of the town and has strong political and community support.

The Port of Lowestoft is owned by Associated British Ports and this includes the outer harbour. The port is undergoing a period of expansion, primarily as a result of the large number of wind farms either in operation, being constructed or being planned off the East Anglian coast. There is also the exciting prospect, post-Brexit, of a revival of the fishing industry. Lowestoft used to be the fishing capital of the southern North sea—a crown that I hope it will acquire again. The port is strategically well placed to serve the wind farms, both for project management during their construction and for their subsequent operations and maintenance. The port is the main base for the Greater Gabbard offshore wind farm and the East Anglia Array. Last year, Scottish Power opened its new £25 million operations and maintenance base in the Hamilton dock.

The original programme for the construction of the tidal barrier envisaged the port closing for up to six months. It has subsequently become clear that this is not practical, as it would make the port unattractive to current and future wind energy companies and business would be lost that we would never be able to get back. The programme for building the barrier has thus been amended to enable it to be constructed over three short windows each winter, without the necessity of closing the port for any significant period. These plans are now fully developed, but the cost of amending the design and elongating the programme has resulted in the cost of the project rising from approximately £30 million to approximately £70 million. This is the funding gap that now needs to be filled.

There are now three phases to the project. Work on the first two phases—the fluvial and pluvial works, and the tidal walls—will start this year, and the final phase of the flood barrier will be carried out once funding is in place. The project has three particular advantages. First, it is highly innovative. It involves a tidal barrier that will be installed while still accommodating a 24/7 operational port, and it will not impact on the port’s activities. Its delivery will still enable the port to attract new business that will help revitalise the town by bringing new jobs to the area.

Secondly, the need to be low carbon is ingrained in the project’s DNA. East Suffolk Council has made a commitment to carbon neutrality in its procurement procedures and, as such, its existing and future procurement arrangements will reduce the carbon footprint of all new council development. Moreover, the scheme will help to promote the offshore wind industry, which is so important in reducing the nation’s carbon footprint.

Finally, there will be a high level of local and UK content. Local businesses have been involved at the design stage, and their participation will be strongly encouraged and promoted during construction. Moreover, once completed, those businesses will be able to grow as part of the offshore renewables sector.

The construction of the Lowestoft flood barrier will be a catalyst for the regeneration of the town, not only for the offshore energy sector but in fishing through the REAF—Renaissance of East Anglian Fisheries—budget. This is not just a barrier in name, but in its impact: it removes barriers to growth. The overall benefits of the barrier to the town are significant, as the protection provided will remove the risk of flooding, which will allow much-needed regeneration and redevelopment projects to proceed. In the town centre, it will allow new commercial and residential development, which is currently held back due to the risk of flooding.

A study carried out by Mott MacDonald showed that 71% of the current economic value in the town is at risk due to flooding—a significant barrier to jobs and growth creation. The flood defence project reduces the risk to 3% over five years. The Mott MacDonald study also shows that the scheme will support the generation of 3,500 additional direct jobs locally and 8,000 indirect and induced jobs nationally. It will generate an additional £195 million per annum of gross value added. In summary, the barrier will remove barriers to the regeneration of growth in the UK’s most easterly town.

While Lowestoft and the surrounding area are benefiting from the emergence of the offshore wind sector, the opportunity to raise funds from the many developments taking place off the East Anglian coast to improve infrastructure is currently constrained. The coastal communities fund, which is financed by money received by the Treasury from the Crown Estate out of royalties received from the granting of licences for the wind farms, runs until 2021. In reviewing the fund, I ask the Government to consider targeting projects directly related to the offshore wind industry, such as the Lowestoft flood barrier, that will have a significant economic impact.

Madam Deputy Speaker, you will be pleased to hear that I have nearly finished.

The Lowestoft tidal flood barrier provides the town’s residents and businesses with the protection and peace of mind that they are entitled to expect. It is also the key to unlocking many great opportunities for the town. I have sought to highlight some of them, and I ask the Minister to set out the pathway that East Suffolk Council and I should pursue to ensure the project secures full funding as soon as practically possible and that we build the Lowestoft tidal flood barrier without delay.

23/01/2020