Category: Speeches

  • Michael Gove – 2021 Statement on Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee Meeting

    Michael Gove – 2021 Statement on Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee Meeting

    The statement made by Michael Gove, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, on 25 February 2021.

    The European Union and the United Kingdom held the first meeting of the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee following the end of the transition period on 24 February.

    The parties welcomed the progress made on citizens’ rights in recent weeks in implementing the rights of UK nationals in the EU and EU citizens in the UK under the withdrawal agreement, and reiterated the importance of communication and support to the most vulnerable.

    Further to the meeting of the Joint Committee co-chairs on 11 February 2021, the EU and the UK also took stock of the implementation of the protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland and of work to find pragmatic solutions. The parties acknowledged the importance of joint action to make the protocol work for the benefit of everyone in Northern Ireland. In that spirit, the EU and UK reiterated their full commitment to the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement in all its dimensions, and to the proper implementation of the protocol. Building on the recent outreach by the Joint Committee co-chairs, there would be further joint engagement with business groups and other stakeholders in Northern Ireland. The UK and the EU underlined their shared commitment to giving effect to those solutions agreed through the Joint Committee on 17 December 2020, without delay. The UK noted that it would provide a new operational plan with respect to supermarkets and their suppliers, alongside additional investment in digital solutions for traders in accordance with the protocol.

    Noting the need for ongoing engagement and the shared desire to act at pace, the UK and EU agreed that a further Joint Committee would be held to provide further steers and where appropriate approvals, and would liaise on timings.

  • Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement on Myanmar

    Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement on Myanmar

    The statement made by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, on 25 February 2021.

    The UK condemns the coup in Myanmar in the strongest possible terms and we stand with the people of Myanmar who were clear at the elections in November that they want a democratic future.

    Since 1 February the UK has led a strong, co-ordinated international response to support the Myanmar people and put pressure on the military.

    We have led statements by G7 Foreign Ministers on 3 February and 23 February: convened an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council and co-ordinated a statement from all members condemning the coup on 4 February and co-led a special Session of the Human Rights Council on 12 February.

    Last week, alongside our Canadian counterparts, we also announced sanctions on three individuals responsible for serious human rights violations committed by the military and police.

    Today I am announcing further measures to increase the pressure on the Myanmar military following the coup.

    First, the UK will impose sanctions on six military members of Myanmar’s State Administration Council for their role in overseeing human rights violations. This includes the Commander-in-Chief, General Min Aung Hlaing, Secretary of the SAC, Lieutenant General Aung Lin Dwe, Joint Secretary of the SAC, Lieutenant General Ye Win Oo, General Tin Aung San, General Maung Maung Kyaw, and Lieutenant General Moe Myint Tun. The measures prevent these individuals from travelling to the United Kingdom and freeze any assets held in this country.

    Secondly, the UK will temporarily suspend all trade promotion in Myanmar and launch a strategic review of the UK’s trade and investment approach. We are clear that UK businesses should not be supporting the military or their businesses. The joint FCDO-DIT review will look at identifying sectors with limited exposure to the military, opportunities for responsible development and mitigating the risk to Myanmar’s poorest.

    Thirdly, I can confirm that following a review of all UK aid in Myanmar, the UK has suspended all support involving the Myanmar Government directly or indirectly unless there are exceptional humanitarian reasons. Support for Government-led reforms has been stopped and planned programmes will close. Our remaining programmes will focus on reaching the poorest and most vulnerable in Myanmar.

    The international community has sent a clear message to Myanmar. The military must hand back power to the democratically elected Government and release all those detained arbitrarily.

  • Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement on Arrests in Hong Kong

    Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement on Arrests in Hong Kong

    The statement made by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, on 1 March 2021.

    The decision to charge 47 Hong Kong politicians and activists for conspiracy to commit subversion under the National Security Law is another deeply disturbing step. It demonstrates in the starkest way the use of the law to stifle any political dissent, rather than restore security which was the claimed intention of the legislation. The National Security Law violates the Joint Declaration, and its use in this way contradicts the promises made by the Chinese government, and can only further undermine confidence that it will keep its word on such sensitive issues.

  • Dominic Raab – 2021 Comments on Covid-19 Vaccines in the Ivory Coast

    Dominic Raab – 2021 Comments on Covid-19 Vaccines in the Ivory Coast

    The comments made by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, on 1 March 2021.

    Today, with UK aid support, people in Côte d’Ivoire are the first to receive vaccinations through COVAX – the biggest ever global vaccine campaign to end the pandemic.

    We’re proud to be one of the biggest donors to COVAX, securing over one billion doses for the most vulnerable around the world. We do it because we want to be a force for good in the world, and because we need a global solution to a global pandemic.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2021 Speech at Bloomberg

    Anneliese Dodds – 2021 Speech at Bloomberg

    The speech made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 1 March 2021.

    This is a critical moment in the crisis.

    We can clearly see our way out. Over 20 million people vaccinated so far, thanks to the extraordinary effort of our NHS and GP staff, scientists, lab technicians, nurses and volunteers.

    As spring is returning, so too is the hope of an end to restrictions.

    But we cannot be complacent. It will still require a huge collective effort to make sure we emerge from this crisis as quickly as possible.

    The open question is how we emerge, and what kind of economy – what kind of country – we emerge into.

    Wednesday’s Budget is a test of character for Rishi Sunak. The choices he makes will be critical in determining that future.

    He can set out a responsible plan that puts us on the path to a better, more secure future.

    A plan to mend the foundations of an economy that for the last decade has simply not been working for too many people in this country.

    A plan to give people the security and prosperity they deserve, to take us forward into a better future beyond the pandemic.

    Or he can stay true to recent form.

    A rolling cycle of chopping and changing, leaving businesses and families scratching their heads and anxious about what’s coming next.

    Headline-grabbing announcements that don’t last a fortnight, let alone the long months of winter.

    Last-minute U-turns that have cost jobs and livelihoods.

    All because the Chancellor has wanted to get out of the business of supporting the economy at the earliest available opportunity, in the face of all the evidence.

    He hasn’t had a plan. He’s just been looking for the escape hatch.

    This Wednesday is his last chance to put that right, and to make amends.

    To learn the mistakes of a year of short-termism – and a decade of his party weakening our economic foundations – and set out a long-term, responsible strategy to take the country forward.

    To do that requires the Chancellor to understand the link between the health crisis and the economic crisis. Something he has signally failed to do so far.

    In the false belief that it was protecting the economy, the Government was too slow to lock down last spring.
    That meant the lockdown lasted longer and was more severe, doing more damage to businesses and jobs.

    Then, in autumn, infection rates were rising again. Labour, heeding the advice of SAGE, proposed a circuit break, to coincide with half term and get the virus under control.

    But the Chancellor reportedly convinced the Prime Minister to overrule SAGE.

    The second lockdown, when it came, lasted four weeks and missed that half term window. Another unnecessarily large hit to our economy.

    In December, the Coronavirus outlook darkened further. Yet instead of acting to protect the economy, the Government pushed the Brexit negotiations to the wire with no heed to the impact this uncertainty caused for business.

    At that point, the Chancellor disappeared. Six weeks without a single appearance in Parliament. No comment when Christmas plans were cancelled. And then just a 90-second video on Twitter 24 hours after the third national lockdown was announced.

    Businesses and workers left in the lurch again.

    Throughout the whole crisis, the Chancellor has failed to make that link between health and our economy.

    He can’t see that targeted, effective funding to support self-isolation would constitute a net gain for our economy, not a net cost.

    If people who have Coronavirus don’t stay at home, transmission increases and the economy is subject to restrictions for longer.

    Yet right now only three in ten people who should self-isolate are doing so.

    A year ago today, the TUC launched a campaign to improve statutory sick pay with the full backing of the trade union movement. A year later it is still just £95.85 a week – just £1.60 more than it was that day. That’s one of the lowest rates in Europe – the Health Secretary himself has admitted he could not live on it – and two million workers are not covered at all. It’s simply not good enough.

    It took months for the Chancellor to come up with a scheme to support some of those affected. When he did, only one worker in eight was automatically eligible.

    Changes made last week, months after the scheme was first launched, are a step in the right direction – but it’s still not clear if it will be enough. And the Chancellor has refused to even contemplate long-term changes to Statutory Sick Pay.

    Where Rishi Sunak has introduced broader economic support, it has not been part of a coherent, long-term plan – but has involved endless chopping and changing.
    The impact of this irresponsible approach can be counted, in lost jobs and lost livelihoods.

    In the run-up to the Chancellor’s summer statement, as the costs to business of the furlough scheme were about to ratchet up, planned redundancies doubled.
    In September, as he proposed the ill-fated Job Support Scheme, redundancies jumped again – by another 40 per cent.

    In the three months from September to November – when the Chancellor was announcing a new version of his Winter Economic Plan every other week, before we finally got a screeching U-turn just hours before the furlough scheme was due to end – redundancies hit almost 400,000, an all-time record.

    Unemployment kept increasing in the UK, while in other countries it was finally stabilising.

    That is the Sunak effect. While he dithers and delays, people right across the country lose their jobs.

    Coronavirus may have closed large parts of our economy. But this Government crashed it.

    We’ve ended up with the worst economic crisis of any major economy. The Chancellor must take responsibility for that.

    And he must learn from it. Because now he is making exactly the same mistakes again.

    1.7 million people are unemployed. 4.7 million are still on furlough. 850,000 businesses are at risk of closure in the next three months.

    And last week the Prime Minister announced that restrictions will still be in place, in some form, until at least 21 June.

    Yet the furlough scheme is due to end on 30 April with no clarity on what happens next.

    Hard-hit businesses face a business rates bill landing on the doormat this month while the door is still closed to customers.

    And VAT is set to spike in just a few weeks’ time for hospitality, culture and tourism businesses that are already teetering on the brink.

    The Chancellor could have set out a plan to address these cliff-edges at the beginning of the year, when it was obvious that new variants of the virus meant we would sadly be living with restrictions for longer.

    At the very latest, he could have set out a plan alongside the Prime Minister’s statement last Monday.

    He could have done what Labour has repeatedly called for, and ensured that economic support went hand in hand with health restrictions.
    But once again, there was no plan from Rishi Sunak.

    He left families and businesses across the country in limbo, all so he could wait for the political theatre of his big Budget moment.

    An irresponsible approach from an out of touch Chancellor.

    Not only is there no plan for the short-term, for the next few months as the vaccine is rolled out.

    There is also no plan for what comes after that.

    The Chancellor should have been doing everything he could to make sure that when lockdown was lifted the economy could be firing on all cylinders again.
    In July last year, I urged him to set out a full Back to Work Budget focused on jobs, jobs, jobs.

    Instead, we got a short economic statement and what the Chancellor reassured me was a ‘Plan for Jobs.’

    His so-called plan had three key elements.

    First, a bonus to every company that kept on a furloughed worker after the end of the scheme. That would have meant over £2.5 billion of public money going to firms who were going to bring staff back anyway. In the end, that didn’t matter because he scrapped the scheme. And we still have no word on its replacement.

    Second, the Kickstart programme was meant to help young unemployed people back into work. Nine months on, just one in every hundred eligible young people have been helped by the scheme. For every job supported by the scheme, 22 have been lost.

    Third, the Green Homes Grant scheme was going to create new jobs retrofitting people’s homes. This has been so badly run that most of the money will never be spent and it’s actually costing jobs.

    With the prospect of a million more people losing their jobs in the months to come, this is simply not good enough.

    And now he’s choosing a course that will actively make the situation worse.
    Families across the country have sacrificed so much throughout this crisis, and yet Rishi Sunak’s reward is to hit them with a triple hammer blow of council tax rises, social security cuts and pay freezes.

    The Chancellor’s message to our key workers – our teachers, our police officers, our armed forces personnel – at the end of one of the hardest years in living memory is to say: you deserve a real-terms pay cut.

    That is spectacularly unjust. It’s also economically illiterate.

    If you take money out of people’s pockets, they’ll tighten their belts and spend less. Our high street shops and small businesses will have fewer customers.
    The economy will take longer to recover, more businesses will fail and more jobs will be lost.

    From the IMF and the World Bank to the OECD, every major international economic organisation is in agreement: now is not the time for tax rises on struggling businesses or families.

    In private, it seems Rishi Sunak is clear about his rationale for this: to get tax rises out of the way now, well ahead of the next election. In other words, a Chancellor who is putting the interests of the Conservative Party ahead of those of the country.

    In public, the Chancellor might couch his decisions in the language of fiscal responsibility, but that’s hard to take from a Government that has wasted and mismanaged billions over the course of this last year.

    £22 billion on a Test and Trace system that for months wasn’t delivering.
    £150 million on PPE that wasn’t safe and so couldn’t be used.

    Almost £2 billion in contracts to businesses with clear links to the Conservative party, with no tender at all.

    £7,000 a day to management consultants while families across the country wondered how they were going to make ends meet.
    We’ll take no lectures from this Government on how to manage public money.

    After a year of last-minute scrambles, of U-turns, waste and mismanagement, what families and businesses need from the Chancellor is a clear plan.
    A plan to protect jobs and businesses through the last stages of the crisis while the vaccine is being rolled out.

    A plan to secure the recovery in those critical first months as we emerge from the crisis and reopen the economy.

    A plan to lay the foundations so we can rebuild our economy, stronger and more prosperous than before.

    To protect jobs and businesses right now, the Chancellor must heed Labour’s call to extend the furlough scheme beyond the end of April, maintaining it for as long as health restrictions are in place and demand remains low. He should make it smarter, so furloughed staff can train for the future; and so abuses are stamped out.

    He should right the wrong of always treating self-employed people as second class citizens, clarifying the future of Self-Employment Income Support Scheme and expanding its scope. He should act urgently to fix the gaps that have seen millions excluded altogether since the crisis began.

    The Chancellor should also extend business rates relief for at least six months, while learning from the Labour Government in Wales and introducing a cap for the biggest essential retailers so that support is targeted to the hardest-hit businesses.

    He should extend the reduced rate of VAT for the hospitality, tourism and culture sectors for at least six months, providing a vital boost to demand as we gradually unlock.

    And he should extend eligibility for the £500 Test and Trace Support Payment, helping to ensure this is absolutely the last lockdown. We cannot afford to go backwards.

    The second part of this long-overdue plan should focus on securing the recovery.

    That means transforming his stuttering and slow employment programmes to deliver a ‘Jobs Promise’ for unemployed young people to get them into work, education or training within six months and to end the scourge of long-term unemployment – simplifying his complicated, failing initiatives to deliver the support that people need now, not in 18 months when the peak of unemployment should be reducing.

    It means accelerating £30bn of planned investment into the next 18 months to support the creation of up to 400,000 new, green jobs. It is incredible that in November, in the midst of an economic crisis, the Chancellor actually chose to cut £300m of planned capital spend.

    And it means taking decisive action now to help those businesses who took out Government-backed loans last year and are likely to struggle with repayments. We need those businesses focused on growing, expanding and hiring – so small businesses should only start paying loans back when they are profitable.

    And crucially, if we are to secure our recovery, the Chancellor must reverse his irresponsible plan to hit households with a triple blow of council tax rises, social security cuts and pay freezes.

    The final part of the plan must be to rebuild the foundations of our economy for a better, more secure future.

    We cannot go back to the way that things were before the crisis, where ten years of Conservative rule had left us one of the most unequal countries in Europe. Where one in four families had less than £100 in savings. Where 3.6 million people were in insecure work.

    Coronavirus has brutally exposed the weaknesses of ten years of Conservative mismanagement of our economy. This crisis has to act as a wake-up call for this Conservative Chancellor to fix them.

    Where he promises to invest, he must follow through. The country can’t afford a repeat of the priority school building programme, with less than half of the planned schools built, and the project running three years late and £300m over budget. Nor still be waiting for new infrastructure nearly seven years on, as people in the North of England are for the long-promised Northern Rail. Nor wondering when their new hospital will be ready, like those in the West Midlands who will need to wait four years longer than planned.

    That is the Conservative track record: of overpromising and under delivering, of always going for the short-term fix rather than taking the difficult decisions for the long term. It is irresponsible at the best of times. In the midst of an economic crisis, it’s unforgiveable.

    And yet it is precisely where we seem to be again. Take housing. We know that young people in this country face a seemingly insurmountable challenge in getting their first home. Home ownership has fallen on the Conservatives’ watch. Six years ago they promised 200,000 starter homes, and not a single one was ever built.

    The Chancellor’s plans this weekend will do little to help more than a tiny proportion of ‘Generation Rent’- and look set to raise house prices even further beyond the reach of the rest.

    Instead, we need to see investment working for every part of our country.

    An expansion of the Start Up Loans scheme getting 100,000 new businesses up and running in the next five years.

    The new National Infrastructure Bank – re-announced this weekend to great fanfare – needs to have a mandate that ensures it backs projects that will make a real difference to communities, with savers given a stake in the recovery through British Recovery Bonds.

    An end to the plan to sell off our high streets to the highest bidder, with local councils instead giving the powers to bring empty shops back to life and make town centres the beating hearts of our communities again.

    The Chancellor may have finally heeded Labour this weekend and announced new short-term funding for our high streets, but that will be totally undermined if planning reforms come into effect this summer and our town centres are gutted as a result.

    We need an approach to investment that brings local people together, offering them opportunities and better prospects – not pitting town against town and region against region in a scramble for funding handed down from on high by Conservative ministers.

    This is a moment for the Chancellor to set out a responsible plan for our country’s future.

    Over the last year he has compounded a decade of Conservative economic mismanagement with twelve months of irresponsible decision making – leading to the worst economic crisis of any major economy.

    On Wednesday he can face up to those failures, learn from them and put the country back on the right path.

    I’m clear on what we need.

    A plan to protect jobs and businesses while the vaccine is being rolled out.

    A plan to secure the recovery as we emerge from the crisis.

    A plan to rebuild the foundations of our economy so that we can look ahead to a better, more secure future.

    That’s what a Labour Budget would deliver.

    It’s what the people of Britain deserve.

    And it’s how we should all judge the Chancellor.

    Thank you.

  • Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2021 Comments on Brazil Strain of Virus

    Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2021 Comments on Brazil Strain of Virus

    The comments made by Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Shadow Home Secretary, on 1 March 2021.

    This is unforgivable incompetence from the UK Government. Despite being warned time and time again, they have failed to act to protect our borders against emerging Covid variants and could put at risk the gains from the vaccine.

    People will be appalled to hear someone with the Brazilian variant cannot be identified, raising questions about how many others may have been missed by quarantine measures. There is no excuse for continuing to ignore Labour’s call for a comprehensive hotel quarantine system.

  • Kit Malthouse – 2021 Speech on the Fire Safety Bill

    Kit Malthouse – 2021 Speech on the Fire Safety Bill

    The speech made by Kit Malthouse, the Minister for Crime and Policing, in the House of Commons on 24 February 2021.

    We consulted on our proposals to deliver on the inquiry’s recommendations and to strengthen the fire safety order. This consultation closed in October 2020 and we intend to publish our response this spring. We also intend to bring forward legislation as soon as practicable after the Bill is commenced. Our consultation gave all those affected the opportunity to make their voices heard. This Lords amendment, however, does not do that. It disregards the intent of the statutory duty to consult and seeks to implement changes that do not take account of the responses to the fire safety consultation.

    I should restate to the House that we intend to use article 24(1) of the fire safety order, which provides a regulation-making power and a statutory duty to consult, to deliver the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s recommendations. Our proposals will include creating new legal duties for the responsible person in the most practical and effective manner. This includes a proposal for the responsible person to provide information to their local fire and rescue authority about the design of their building’s external walls and the materials they are constructed from, and provide it with up-to-date building floor plans in a standard format, highlighting the location of key firefighting systems within their building. Responsible persons will be required to undertake checks of flat entrance doors, fire doors in the common parts and self-closing devices. Regular inspections of all lifts and other key firefighting equipment in their building will be mandatory, reporting any faults to their local fire and rescue authorities alongside this. There will be an obligation to produce and regularly review evacuation plans for their buildings, and we will look to impose requirements on premises’ information boxes, which will include up-to-date floor plans and other documents as recommended by the inquiry. We will also require the installation of way-finding signage in all multi-occupational residential buildings of 11 metres and over. We are also committed to seek further views on the complex issue of personal emergency evacuation plans. A further consultation will open in the spring and details will soon be available on the Government website.

    Some of our proposals from the consultation will require primary legislation. These include strengthening the effect of guidance relating to the discharge of duties under the fire safety order; providing for responsible persons in all regulated premises to record who they are and to provide a UK-based address; the placement of a new requirement on responsible persons for all regulated premises to take reasonable steps to identify themselves to all other responsible persons—this could apply, for example, to a building that houses both commercial and residential units; a requirement that those completing a fire risk assessment must be competent; an obligation on all responsible persons to record their completed fire risk assessments; and for responsible persons to record the name and organisation of those they have engaged to complete the fire risk assessments. There will also be the obligation that any outgoing responsible person be required to pass on all relevant fire safety information to those taking over such responsibilities under the fire safety order. And there are potential measures to increase fines, particularly with regard to the impersonation of an inspector. We intend to include those measures, and possibly others, in the Building Safety Bill, which will be introduced after the Government have considered the recommendations made by the Select Committee on Housing, Communities and Local Government and when parliamentary time allows.

    I also wish to place on record the Government’s view that there are fundamental flaws with this Lords amendment. First, on the issue of lift checks, the Grenfell inquiry’s recommendation was specific in that it called for checks of lifts to be carried out on high-rise buildings at monthly intervals. The Lords amendment goes a lot further and applies to all multi-occupied residential buildings. That means that even if such a building was only two storeys high but happened to have a lift, it would require the same approach as a high-rise block. This is not a proportionate solution.

    I am also concerned about how inflexible this amendment is. In respect of both lifts and fire doors, it offers no ability to change the frequency of checks without further primary legislation. For example, it may be the case in future that the most appropriate course of action to respond to an evolving situation would be to have a bespoke checks regime for certain types of building that is different from that for other properties. This is but one example of how this amendment could constrain the Government’s ability to keep residents safe, and it is right that we maintain the flexibility to react responsibly to future changes in circumstances.

    We have talked about the financial privilege grounds in relation to this amendment, and the reason for this is that we already intend to cover the areas of the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s recommendations mentioned in the Opposition amendment through regulations. We have provided an estimate of the impact of our consultation proposals, which has also been published on the Fire Safety Bill pages of the parliamentary website. It is important to mention in respect of undertaking monthly checks on lifts in all buildings, for example, rather than just in high-rise residential premises, that the costs would be significantly higher than we have accounted for.

    I am also concerned about the territorial scope of this amendment. The Bill applies to England and Wales, with the exception of the Government’s amendment on risk-based guidance, which will be for England only. The Opposition want this amendment to apply to Wales, but it does not have the explicit consent of the Senedd. The Welsh Government have expressed the view that this would be a breach of the Sewel convention.

    I reiterate the Government’s view that this amendment is unnecessary. It seeks to create delegated powers to lay regulations on these specific areas, despite the fact that this power already exists under article 24(1) of the fire safety order. However, I recognise that those on both sides of this House, those in the other place and the public want greater reassurance that we will deliver on our commitment to implement the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s phase 1 recommendations. It is important that we reach a conclusion on this issue, not least because we owe that to the Grenfell community, and I want to underline the Government’s commitment to delivering on the inquiry’s recommendations.

    The Fire Safety Bill is an important first step in the process, which must come first in terms of sequencing. Our intention is to commence this as soon as possible, with supporting risk-based guidance to be ready to support commencement. This will ensure the highest-risk buildings are assessed first. We intend to respond formally to the fire safety consultation shortly. Following on from that, we intend to bring forward regulations as soon as possible. In addition, we have brought forward the Building Safety Bill, which was recently subject to pre-legislative scrutiny. We aim to introduce this after we have considered the recommendations from the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee report. To underline the Government’s firm commitment to deliver on the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s recommendations, we have published our first quarterly updates on the progress being made to implement the recommendations. These updates are broken down by the themes set out in the inquiry’s phase 1 report on the Government website.

    In the interests of getting the Bill finalised and to deliver on important building safety reforms, we were prepared to offer a legislative amendment that would require the Government to report back to Parliament on the specific areas highlighted in the Opposition amendment within 12 months of commencement of the Bill. That would have resolved this issue, and I am disappointed that my offer of this amendment was not accepted by the Opposition. For the extensive reasons I have provided, I hope the House will agree that we are right to reject Lords amendment 2.

    Lords amendment 4 seeks to protect leaseholders and tenants from paying for the remediation of unsafe cladding from their buildings. I recognise that a number of alternative amendments have been tabled. I expect we will hear a number of views on this issue today, and I intend to respond to them at the end of the debate, given that many of those interventions will be virtual. First, I should state that we agree with the intent to give leaseholders peace of mind and financial certainty. That is why the Government have recently announced that we will be providing an additional £3.5 billion to fund the removal and replacement of unsafe cladding, targeted at the highest-risk buildings. That brings the total investment in building safety to an unprecedented £5 billion.

    Gary Sambrook (Birmingham, Northfield) (Con)

    The amendments would also be impractical—for example, in cases where it would be difficult to identify whether a risk has materialised from wear and tear or due to a building safety defect. Stating what the landlord can and cannot recover from leaseholders may well contradict the provisions set out in the contractual terms of the lease. It would be unclear where these costs should lie, rather than their being determined by the terms of the lease. This might result in delay to crucial interim measures to protect residents while remediation is being brought forward, meaning that fire rescue services would have no choice but to evacuate residents. Additionally, the amendments, though well-intentioned, would not always protect leaseholders from all remediation costs. They apply only to defects uncovered through a fire risk assessment, but not, for example, to defects discovered as a result of an incident, or indeed other works taking place.

    Members will be aware that, as I have said, we will soon be bringing to Parliament the building safety Bill, which is a once-in-a-generation change to the building safety regime. It will bring about fundamental change in both the regulatory framework for building safety and the construction industry culture, creating a more accountable system to ensure that a tragedy such as Grenfell can never happen again.

  • Andy McDonald – 2021 Speech on Uber

    Andy McDonald – 2021 Speech on Uber

    The speech made by Andy McDonald, the Labour MP for Middlesbrough, in the House of Commons on 24 February 2021.

    Last Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on Uber was a landmark victory for working people, and testament to the hard work of the GMB union, the App Drivers and Couriers Union and the drivers who brought the action. It rejected Uber’s bogus claim that its drivers are self-employed, ruling instead that they are workers and therefore entitled to basic rights that they have so far been denied, such at the national minimum wage and holiday pay. The ruling has far-reaching consequences for tens of thousands of Uber drivers as well as all gig economy workers.

    Yet Uber is attempting to dodge the Supreme Court’s ruling, just as it attempts to dodge its responsibilities to its drivers, by trying to interpret the ruling so that it applies to only a tiny minority of its workforce. If Uber ignores the ruling, tens of thousands of workers will be cheated out of their rights, forcing low-paid and precarious workers to spend time and money that they can ill afford in order to litigate to recover withheld wages, in cases that they will likely win but will take years to conclude. The Government should not abandon working people to fight for their rights in the courts, so will the Minister take this opportunity to make it clear that the judgment applies to all Uber drivers, and that the company cannot continue to cheat its drivers out of their basic rights?

    Even before the pandemic, one in 10 working adults—around 5 million—were found to be working in the gig economy, in fragile and insecure work, and with one-sided flexibility. It is bad for those workers, bad for the economy and, as we have seen from the pandemic, a disaster for public health. Will the Minister confirm that the principles of the judgment in the Uber case must apply not only to all Uber drivers, but to all those on similar arrangements across the country?

    Let me say again that the Government cannot abrogate their responsibility by telling workers to fight for their basic protection through an employment tribunal system that barely functions following a decade of neglect. Working people need a Government who will stand behind them, so will the Minister commit now to legislate to end bogus self-employment and provide security to all gig economy workers?

  • Paul Scully – 2021 Statement on Uber

    Paul Scully – 2021 Statement on Uber

    The statement made by Paul Scully, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 24 February 2021.

    I want to begin by making it absolutely clear that everyone deserves to be treated fairly at work and rewarded for their contribution to the economy with both fair pay and fair working conditions. This means that employers must take their responsibilities seriously, not simply opt out of them. If there is a dispute between the individual and an employer, as seen in the recent case involving Uber, the courts consider each case on an individual basis. The courts are independent and the Government do not intervene. As such, with the Supreme Court being the final stage of the appeal, its judgment is final and Uber will need to take action to align with the judgment.

    The Government recognise concerns about employment status being unclear in some cases, and we are committed to making it easier for individuals and businesses to understand which rights and tax obligations apply to them. We have made good progress in bringing forward measures that add flexibility for workers while ensuring the protection of employment rights. For example, we have legislated to extend the right to a written statement of core terms of employment to all workers, making access to a written statement a day one right and extending the contents of a written statement. We have also banned the use of exclusivity contracts and zero-hours contracts to give workers more flexibility. This means an employer cannot stop an individual on a zero-hours contract from looking for, or accepting work from, another employer. We will continue to explore options for employment status that protect rights while also maintaining flexibility in the labour market. This Government have a proud history of protecting and enhancing workers’ rights, and we are committed to making the UK the best place in the world to work.

  • Gavin Williamson – 2021 Statement on Support for Education Recovery

    Gavin Williamson – 2021 Statement on Support for Education Recovery

    The statement made by Gavin Williamson, the Secretary of State for Education, in the House of Commons on 24 February 2021.

    The pandemic and associated restrictions have had a substantial impact on children and young people’s learning. To address this challenge, the Government have committed to work with parents, teachers and education providers to develop a long-term plan to make sure pupils have the chance to make up their learning over the course of this Parliament. We have also appointed Sir Kevan Collins as education recovery commissioner to advise on this work and review how evidence-based interventions can be used to address the impact the pandemic has had on learning.

    More immediately, we are putting in place a range of additional measures to help children and young people across England. The package of measures gives early years settings, schools and providers of 16-19 education the tools they need to target support to their students, tailored to the differing impact the pandemic has had on each individual.

    New measures include:

    A new, one-off £302 million recovery premium for state primary and secondary schools, building on the pupil premium, to further support pupils who need it most. The average primary school will receive around £6,000 extra, and the average secondary school around £22,000 extra. This will help schools to bolster summer provision for their students, for example laying on additional clubs and activities, or for evidence-based approaches for supporting the most disadvantaged pupils from September.

    £200 million will fund:

    – An expansion of the national tutoring programme for primary and secondary schools, to allow more pupils to benefit from the power of regular tutoring, which has been shown to boost catch up learning by much as 3-5 months at a time.

    – An extension of the 16-19 tuition fund for a further year to support more students in English, maths and other vocational and academic subjects.

    – Support for early language development in the early years, supporting a critical stage of child development.

    £200 million will be available to secondary schools to deliver face-to-face summer schools. Schools will be able to target provision based on pupils’ needs but as evidence suggests that incoming year 7 pupils may be in particular need of support, schools will want to consider their needs in particular. These schools will operate alongside wider summer support funded across the country through our holiday activities and food programme.

    A range of high-quality online resources will be available for all teachers and pupils, starting from the summer term and throughout summer holidays, provided by Oak National Academy, to help give pupils the confidence they are ready for the next academic year.

    This £700 million package incorporates the £300 million announced by the Prime Minister on 27 January and will build on the £1 billion support package that was announced in June 2020. This forms part of the wider response to help pupils make up their learning over the course of this Parliament.