Tag: 2020

  • Boris Johnson – 2020 Speech to UN General Assembly

    Boris Johnson – 2020 Speech to UN General Assembly

    The text of the speech made by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 26 September 2020.

    Never in the history of our species – not since the almighty felled the Tower of Babel – has the human race been so obsessed with one single topic of conversation. We have been following the same debates, researching the potential of the same drugs, and time and again we have been typing the same word into our search engines. COVID-19, coronavirus, has united humanity as never before.

    And yet the crisis has also been an extraordinary force for division. We have all been up against the same enemy. The same tiny opponent threatening everyone in much the same way, but members of the UN have still waged 193 separate campaigns, as if every country somehow contains a different species of human being. Across the world there has been an infinite variety of curfews and restrictions and closures, and we have fought in a spirit of sauve qui peut.

    And the pace has been so urgent and the pressures so intense that each national government – democracy or otherwise – has decided entirely understandably to put the interests of its domestic population first. We have seen borders spring up between friends and allies, sometimes without consultation. We have seen the disruption of global supply chains with cheque book wars on airport tarmacs as nation has vied with nation for a supply of PPE.

    And after nine months of fighting COVID-19, the very notion of the international community looks, frankly, pretty tattered. And we know that we simply can’t continue in this way. Unless we get our act together. Unless we unite and turn our fire against our common foe, we know that everyone will lose. The inevitable outcome would be to prolong this calamity and increase the risk of another.

    Now is the time – therefore, here at what I devoutly hope will be the first and last ever Zoom UNGA – for humanity to reach across borders and repair these ugly rifts. Let’s heal the world – literally and metaphorically. And let’s begin with the truth, because as someone once said, the truth shall set you free.

    And with nearly a million people dead, with colossal economic suffering already inflicted and more to come, there is a moral imperative for humanity to be honest and to reach a joint understanding of how the pandemic began, and how it was able to spread – Not because I want to blame any country or government, or to score points. I simply believe – as a former COVID patient – that we all have a right to know, so that we can collectively do our best to prevent a recurrence.

    And so the UK supports the efforts of the World Health Organisation and of my friend, Tedros, to explore the aetiology of the disease, because however great the need for reform, the WHO, the World Health Organization, is still the one body that marshals humanity against the legions of disease. That is why we in the UK – global Britain – are one of the biggest global funders of that organisation, contributing £340 million over the next four years, that’s an increase of 30 percent.

    And as we now send our medical detectives to interview the witnesses and the suspects – bats, the pangolins, whoever – we should have enough humility to acknowledge that alarm bells were ringing before this calamity struck.

    In the last 20 years, there have been eight outbreaks of a lethal virus, any of which could have escalated into a pandemic. Bill Gates sounded the alert in 2015, five years ago he gave that amazing prediction – almost every word of which has come true – and we responded as if to a persistent Microsoft error message by clicking “ok” and carrying on.

    Humanity was caught napping. We have been scrabbling to catch up, and with agonising slowness we are making progress.

    Epidemiologists at Oxford University identified the first treatment for COVID-19. They did trials with our national health service and found that a cheap medicine called dexamethasone reduces the risk of death by over a third for patients on ventilators. The UK immediately shared this discovery with the world, so that as many as 1.4 million lives could be saved in the next six months by this one, single advance.

    And as I speak there are 100 potential vaccines that are trying to clear the hurdles of safety and efficacy, as if in a giant global steeplechase. We don’t know which may be successful. We do not know if any of them will be successful.

    The Oxford vaccine is now in stage 3 of clinical trials, and in case of success AstraZeneca has already begun to manufacture millions of doses, in readiness for rapid distribution, and they have reached agreement with the Serum Institute of India to supply one billion doses to low and middle-income countries.

    But it would be futile to treat the quest for a vaccine as a contest for narrow national advantage and immoral to seek a head start through obtaining research by underhand means. The health of every country depends on the whole world having access to a safe and effective vaccine, wherever a breakthrough might occur; and, the UK, we will do everything in our power to bring this about.

    We are already the biggest single donor to the efforts of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness to find a vaccine. And it is precisely because we know that no-one is safe until everyone is safe, that I can announce that the UK will contribute up to £571 million to COVAX, a new initiative designed to distribute a COVID-19 vaccine across the world. Of this sum, £500 million will be for developing countries to protect themselves.

    The UK is already the biggest donor to Gavi, the global vaccine alliance. In June we helped to raise almost $9 billion to immunise another 300 million children against killer diseases, and Gavi also stands ready to help distribute a COVID-19 vaccine.

    But even as we strive for a vaccine, we must never cut corners, slim down the trials or sacrifice safety to speed. Because it would be an absolute tragedy if in our eagerness, we were to boost the nutjobs – the anti vaxxers, dangerous obsessives who campaign against the whole concept of vaccination and who would risk further millions of lives.

    And now is the time above all to look ahead and think now about how to stop a pandemic from happening again. How can we stop another virus from coming along and again smashing that precious Ming vase of international cooperation? How can we avoid the mutual quarantines and the brutal Balkanisation of the world economy?

    I don’t think there is any reason for fatalism: of course, the dangers can never be wholly eliminated, but human ingenuity and expertise can reduce the risk. Imagine how much suffering might have been avoided if we had already identified the pathogen that became COVID-19 while it was still confined to animals?

    Suppose we had been able to reach immediately into a global medicine chest and take out a treatment? What if countries had been ready to join together from the outset to develop and trial a vaccine? And think how much strife would have been prevented if the necessary protocols – covering quarantine and data-sharing and PPE and so much else – had, so far as possible, been ready on the shelf for humanity to use?

    So we in the UK we’re going to work with our friends, we’re going to use our G7 presidency next year to create a new global approach to health security based on a five point plan to protect humanity against another pandemic.

    Our first aim should be to stop a new disease before it starts. About 60 percent of the pathogens circulating in the human population originated in animals and leapt from one species to the other in a “zoonotic” transmission. The world could seek to minimise the danger by forging a global network of zoonotic research hubs, charged with spotting dangerous animal pathogens that may cross the species barrier and infect human beings.

    The UK is ready to harness its scientific expertise and cooperate to the fullest extent with our global partners to this end. Of the billions of pathogens, the great mass are thankfully incapable of vaulting the species barrier. Once we discover the dangerous ones, our scientists could get to work on identifying their weaknesses and refining anti-viral treatments before they strike. We could open the research to every country and as we learn more, our scientists might begin to assemble an armoury of therapies – a global pharmacopoeia – ready to make the treatment for the next COVID-19.

    Our second step should be to develop the manufacturing capacity for treatments and vaccines So that the whole of humanity can hold them like missiles in silos ready to zap the alien organisms before they can attack. But if that fails and a new disease jumps from animals to human beings and overcomes our armoury of therapies and begins to spread, then we need to know what’s going on as fast as possible.

    So the third objective should be to design a global pandemic early warning system, based on a vast expansion of our ability to collect and analyse samples and distribute the findings, using health data-sharing agreements covering every country. As far as possible, we should aim to predict a pandemic almost as we forecast the weather to see the thunderstorm in the cloud no bigger than a man’s hand.

    And if all our defences are breached, and we face another crisis, we should at least be able to rely on our fourth step, and have all the protocols ready for an emergency response, covering every relevant issue, along with the ability to devise new ones swiftly.

    Never again must we wage 193 different campaigns against the same enemy. As with all crises, it is crucial not to learn the wrong lessons. After the harrowing struggle to equip ourselves with enough ventilators – with countries scrabbling to improvise like the marooned astronauts of Apollo 13 – there is a global movement to onshore manufacturing. That is understandable. Here in the UK we found ourselves unable to make gloves, aprons, enzymes which an extraordinary position for a country that was once the workshop of the world. We need to rediscover that latent gift and instinct, but it would be insane to ignore the insights of Adam Smith and David Ricardo.

    We need secure supply chains – but we should still rely on the laws of comparative advantage and the invisible hand of the market. Many countries imposed export controls at the outset of the pandemic, about two thirds of which remain in force. Governments still target their trade barriers on exactly what we most need to combat the virus, with tariffs on disinfectant often exceeding 10 percent, and for soap tariffs for 30 percent.

    So I would urge every country to take a fifth step and lift the export controls wherever possible – and agree not to revive them – and cancel any tariffs on the vital tools of our struggle: gloves, protective equipment, thermometers and other COVID-critical products. The UK will do this as soon as our new independent tariff regime comes into effect on 1st January and I hope others will do the same.

    Though the world is still in the throes of this pandemic, all these steps are possible if we have the will. They are the right way forward for the world, and Britain is the right country to give that lead. And we will do so in 2021, as we celebrate the 75th anniversary of the founding of this great United Nations in London in January, and through our G7 Presidency, and as we host the world’s climate change summit, COP26, in Glasgow next November.

    The COVID-19 pandemic has been an immense psychic shock to the human race. Global fears have been intensified by the immediacy of round the clock news and social media. We sometimes forget, we face a virus – a small package of nucleic acid that simply replicates. It is not even technically alive.

    Tragic as its consequences have been, it has been nothing like as destructive as other plagues – let alone the influenza of a century ago. It is absurd, in many ways, outrageous that this microscopic enemy should have routed the unity of the human race.

    COVID-19 has caused us to cease other vital work, and I’m afraid it made individual nations seem selfish and divided from each other. Every day people were openly encouraged to study a grisly reverse Olympic league table, and to take morbid and totally mistaken comfort in the greater sufferings of others.

    We cannot go on like that, we cannot make these mistakes again. And here in the UK, the birthplace of Edward Jenner who pioneered the world’s first vaccine We are determined to do everything in our power to work with our friends across the UN, to heal those divisions and to heal the world.

  • Matt Hancock – 2020 Comments on Self-Isolating

    Matt Hancock – 2020 Comments on Self-Isolating

    The comments made by Matt Hancock, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 28 September 2020.

    Anyone can catch coronavirus and anyone can spread it. We all have a crucial part to play in keeping the number of new infections down and protecting our loved ones.

    As cases rise it is imperative we take action, and we are introducing a legal duty to self-isolate when told to do so, with fines for breaches and a new £500 support payment for those on lower incomes who can’t work from home while they are self-isolating.

    These simple steps can make a huge difference to reduce the spread of the virus, but we will not hesitate to put in place further measures if cases continue to rise.

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2020 Comments on Cancer Screening Catch-Up

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2020 Comments on Cancer Screening Catch-Up

    The comments made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 28 September 2020.

    Finding out you have cancer from a routine screening is already a scary thing to go through without the added anxiety of having to wait for months to start treatment.

    Under normal circumstances a drop in the number of people having to have cancer treatment would be positive, but given what we know has happened over the pandemic it instead looks like people are having trouble accessing screening altogether. It’s especially worrying because we know that early diagnosis and treatment is key to surviving cancer.

    Ministers tell us the NHS has ‘coped’ through the Covid-19 peak but that was on the back of cancelled operations, delayed scans and diagnostic tests.

    Estimates suggest two million people are waiting for cancer screening, tests or treatment and that 1600 cases of cancer are currently left undiagnosed every month.

    It’s now urgent ministers bring forward a plan to tackle the backlog in non Covid-19 care.

  • Tulip Siddiq – 2020 Comments on Childcare Support

    Tulip Siddiq – 2020 Comments on Childcare Support

    The comments made by Tulip Siddiq, the Shadow Minister for Children and Early Years, on 28 September 2020.

    This incompetent Government is completely failing to deliver support working parents with childcare at a time when they need it most.

    With around half of parents struggling to access childcare and the sector on the brink of collapse, it beggars belief that Ministers have repeatedly failed to get support to every family who needs it.

  • Liz Truss – 2020 Statement on the Gender Recognition Act 2004

    Liz Truss – 2020 Statement on the Gender Recognition Act 2004

    The statement made by Liz Truss, the Minister for Women and Equalities, in the House of Commons on 22 September 2020.

    Today, I am announcing the Government’s response to the consultation on the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

    As a Government, we are determined that everyone in the UK should be free to live their lives and fulfil their potential regardless of their sex, gender identity, race or disability.

    We are proud to have introduced same-sex marriage and passed the Turing law.

    We want transgender people to be free to live and to prosper in a modern Britain. We have looked carefully at the issues raised in the consultation, including potential changes to the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

    It is the Government’s view that the balance struck in this legislation is correct, in that there are proper checks and balances in the system and also support for people who want to change their legal sex.

    However, it is also clear that we need to improve the process and experience that transgender people have when applying for a gender recognition certificate—making it kinder and more straightforward. Our changes will address the main concerns that trans people themselves tell us they have about it.​

    In 2017, we conducted by far the largest survey ever of British LGBT people, with over 108,000 respondents, of whom 7,000 were trans. Of those who had completed their transition, around two in five said that they had a gender recognition certificate, a higher proportion than is often believed. The survey then asked those who had not applied what had prevented them from doing so. They were able to choose as many reasons as they wanted.

    Some 38% told us the process was too bureaucratic. So we will place the whole procedure online. Some 34% said the process was too expensive. This, too, we will address. We will reduce the fee from £140 to a nominal amount.

    We have also come to understand that gender recognition reform, though supported in the consultation undertaken by the last Government, is not the top priority for transgender people. Perhaps their most important concern is the state of trans healthcare. Trans people tell us that waiting lists at NHS gender clinics are too long. I agree, and I am deeply concerned at the distress it can cause. That is why we are opening at least three new gender clinics this year, which should see waiting lists cut by around 1,600 patients by 2022. The full benefit of the increases in clinical capacity that we have been able to secure will lead to greater patient choice, shorter waiting times, better geographical coverage and easier access. It will also make it easier to fulfil the medical requirements of obtaining a GRC.

    It is why we last year provided funding for the UK’s first national LGBT health adviser to help improve transgender people’s experience.

    Britain leads the world as a country where everybody is able to lead their life freely and treated with respect and that, for many years, transgender people have been widely accepted in British society: able to use facilities of their chosen gender; and able to participate fully in modern life.

    At the heart of this is the principle of individual liberty. Our philosophy is that a person’s character, their ideas, and their work ethic trumps the colour of their skin or their biological sex. We firmly believe that neither biology nor gender is destiny.

    The Equality Act 2010 clearly protects transgender people from discrimination. The same act allows service providers to restrict access to single sex spaces on the basis of biological sex if there is a clear justification.

    We want every individual, regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity to have the confidence and the freedom to be themselves. We will continue with our international leadership by hosting our international LGBT conference to make sure LGBT people around the world are safe to be themselves.

    I am laying the analysis report of consultation responses as a Command Paper today and it will be published on gov.uk.

    The attachment can be viewed online at: http://www. parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions- answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/ 2020-09-22/HCWS462/.

  • Liz Truss – 2020 Statement on the UK’s Future Trading Relationship with the US

    Liz Truss – 2020 Statement on the UK’s Future Trading Relationship with the US

    The statement made by Liz Truss, the Secretary of State for International Trade, in the House of Commons on 22 September 2020.

    The fourth UK-US free trade agreement (FTA) negotiating round took place from 8 September to 18 September 2020.

    There were 29 sessions held in this round, covering 16 different chapter areas. Significant progress has been achieved since launching negotiations in May 2020, and most chapter areas are now in the advanced stages of talks.

    In total, 132 sessions have been held over the past four negotiating rounds, as well as an additional 30 inter- sessional discussions, involving officials from 20 different UK Government Departments and agencies.

    In the fourth round, both sides continued to have detailed textual discussions, and negotiators are now in the process of consolidating texts in the majority of chapter areas.

    Shortly before the fourth negotiating round both sides exchanged their first tariff offers, allowing a series of detailed market access discussions to be held during the round.​

    The exchange of tariff offers is a notable milestone, and the speed at which this stage has been reached demonstrates the momentum behind these negotiations.

    Both sides reiterated their commitment to continue negotiations at pace throughout the Autumn in advance of the US presidential elections.

    The fifth round of talks will take place in mid to late October, with additional intersessional discussions taking place between the fourth and fifth rounds. Further such talks will be held this week on telecommunications, intellectual property, market access, and rules of origin.

    Below is a summary list of those workstreams discussed in the round:

    Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS)

    Customs and trade facilitation

    Competition

    Technical barriers to trade (TBT)

    Market access

    Financial services

    Good regulatory practice

    Rules of origin

    Investment

    Economics

    Cross border trade in services

    Industrial subsidies

    Sectoral annexes

    Core text

    Trade remedies

    State owned enterprises

  • Victoria Atkins – 2020 Statement on Modern Slavery

    Victoria Atkins – 2020 Statement on Modern Slavery

    The statement made by Victoria Atkins, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, in the House of Commons on 22 September 2020.

    Today, the Government have published their response to the transparency in supply consultation. A copy of the Government response will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and it will also be published on gov.uk.

    The landmark transparency provisions in the Modern Slavery Act 2015 established the UK as the first country in the world to require businesses to report annually on their work to prevent and address risks of modern slavery in their operations and supply chains. This legislation was introduced to empower investors, consumers and civil society to hold businesses to account, and it has since sparked an international trend for supply chains legislation.

    I am proud that thousands of businesses have risen to the challenge of reporting and consistently raised the benchmark for transparency since the Act came into force. This year the Government joined the private sector in opening up about their supply chains, becoming the first country in the world to publish a Government modern slavery statement setting out how we are leveraging public spending to prevent risks in Government supply chains and drive responsible practices. In his foreword to the statement, the Prime Minister made the Government’s ambitions clear:

    “It’s not enough for Government and businesses to simply say they don’t tolerate modern slavery. As we take stock of both the challenges faced and achievements made, we must match our words with actions.”

    Five years on from the Act, it has become more important than ever that businesses take responsibility for their supply chains, and I am committed to ensuring this Government maintain their global leadership on this agenda. In May 2019, the final report of the independent review of the Modern Slavery Act, led by Frank Field, my right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller) and the noble Baroness Butler-Sloss GBE, considered the Act’s transparency legislation alongside four other key areas and made a compelling case for change. In response, the Home Office launched a public consultation seeking views on a range of measures to strengthen section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act and enhance the impact of transparency.

    I am grateful for the expertise of the reviewers and of those who responded to the consultation. Today, I am proud to announce the ambitious package of measures we will be taking forwards to strengthen and future-proof the Modern Slavery Act’s transparency legislation.

    To improve transparency, we will be requiring all organisations caught by the Act to publish their statement to a central Government-run reporting service, to ensure organisations’ work to prevent modern slavery is open to scrutiny. At the same time, we will be introducing ​mandatory topics that modern slavery statements must cover, to increase transparency and encourage year on year improvement in key areas. Taken together, these measures will drive a race to the top, ensuring progress is recognised and gaps are addressed.

    To improve compliance, we will introduce a single reporting deadline on which all statements must be published. We are also considering options for civil penalties for non-compliance forwards in line with the development of the single enforcement body for employment rights, led by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

    Finally, we will be extending the reporting requirement to public bodies—a global first. Leveraging public spending is a crucial step towards driving responsible practices and identifying risks, and I welcome the voluntary efforts of many public sector organisations on this agenda. Like businesses, public sector organisations have a responsibility to be transparent about modern slavery risks in their supply chains and how these are being addressed. Ministerial Government Departments have already committed to publishing annual modern slavery statements, the first of which will be published in September 2021.

    Many of these measures are global firsts. However, I am determined that Government and industry do everything possible to protect vulnerable workers from exploitation. Tackling modern slavery remains a priority for the Government and I will continue to look at what further measures are needed to strengthen our response, in partnership with the devolved Administrations, law enforcement, business, public sector organisations, NGOs, civil society and the independent anti-slavery commissioner.

  • Caroline Dinenage – 2020 Statement on Loot Boxes

    Caroline Dinenage – 2020 Statement on Loot Boxes

    The statement made by Caroline Dinenage, the Minister for Digital and Culture, in the House of Commons on 23 September 2020.

    I am today launching a call for evidence on loot boxes in video games. I want to understand fully the existing research and concerns around loot boxes including any evidence of links to gambling-like behaviour and problem ​gambling amongst young people. This fulfils a commitment the Government announced on 8 June as part of their response to the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s report on immersive and addictive technologies.

    The Government take concerns around potential harms from loot boxes seriously. This open call for evidence will seek detailed information on the impact of loot boxes on players, particularly children and young people, examining concerns that loot boxes may encourage gambling-like behaviour and lead to problem gambling, as well as examining the size and scale of the loot box market in the UK, and the impact of current voluntary and statutory protections. The call for evidence will also seek information on the direct experiences of video games players and adults responsible for children and young people who play video games.

    In 2019, the Government committed to review the Gambling Act with a particular focus on tackling issues around online loot boxes. The results from the call for evidence will be considered alongside the review of the Gambling Act and will inform future actions in regard to loot boxes. The Government stand ready to take action should the outcomes of the call for evidence support taking a new approach to ensure users, and particularly young people, are better protected.

    The Government continue to support the growth of the video games sector in the UK, recognising that video games bring great economic, cultural and social benefits. Over half the UK population plays games, the vast majority engaging safely with content that allows them to enjoy fun, exciting play, find moments of relaxation, socialise and learn new skills. The video games sector, a key part of the UK’s world-leading creative industries, is also a cutting edge creator and adopter of innovative new technologies, and a provider of highly skilled creative jobs.

    However, evolving digital technologies such as video games also present new responsibilities to ensure that users, particularly children and vulnerable people, are not exposed to harm.

    I believe the call for evidence the Government are launching today is an important step towards gathering the evidence required to ensure we can support the further growth of this innovative and important industry while protecting users.

    The call for evidence document will be available on gov.uk.

  • James Daly – 2020 Speech on Microchips in Pets

    James Daly – 2020 Speech on Microchips in Pets

    The speech made by James Daly, the Conservative MP for Bury North, in the House of Commons on 23 September 2020.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision regarding pets with microchips; and for connected purposes.

    This Bill should more commonly be known as Tuk’s law and Gizmo’s law. Every responsible pet owner wants to ensure that their pet is safe. It is now a legal requirement for all dog owners to microchip their dogs since compulsory microchipping came into force in 2016. British Veterinary Association best practice guidelines recommend that vets should scan microchips on the first presentation in veterinary surgeries and at other regular intervals, including prior to any decision being made on euthanasia. These guidance notes also include advice on what a vet should do if details of the person presenting the dog are different from what is in the database, and on what to do when stray or lost dogs are brought into the veterinary surgery, including the need to check the microchip databases in order to reunite the animal with its owner or back-up rescuers. Although the guidance is helpful, the Tuk’s law campaign has found that many vets are not following these recommendations and a large number of healthy dogs are being euthanised without checking microchips to ascertain the owners or back-up rescuers.

    To date, over 121,000 people have signed a parliamentary petition set up by the Tuk’s law campaign, calling for a change in the law to make it mandatory for vets to scan microchips for owner and rescue back-up details before euthanising a healthy dog. Tuk’s law campaign began as a result of the premature and unnecessary euthanasia of a young, 16-month-old rescue dog called Tuk, who was a beautiful Mioritic dog who had full rescue back-up and whose rescue contact details were registered on his microchip as a secondary contact. His euthanasia was requested and acted on by someone who was not registered on his microchip—a vet who did not scan him prior to ending his life. Had the vet scanned him, he would have seen the rescue back-up contact details, registered the microchip and contacted the rescuer, who would have collected him and Tuk’s life would have been saved.

    Although Tuk’s death prompted the parliamentary petition, during the past 18 months the reported amount of unnecessary euthanasia of healthy and treatable animals—in particular, rescue animals—has grown alarmingly. Today I am putting forward a private Member’s Bill to ensure that all vets are legally required to scan for owner and rescue back-up contact details on microchips when any healthy or treatable dog is brought into a veterinary surgery to be euthanised. On Government-endorsed microchip databases, a prefix will be added to microchips to identify dual registration of rescue animals. If an unsubstantiated reason for euthanasia is made, the vet will be expected to seek corroborating evidence. Vets will also be expected to seek alternative options to euthanasia in situations where there are no life-threatening or emergency situations causing the dog suffering.

    By implementing this change in legislation, the lives of hundreds of dogs will be saved every year across Britain. Unless we act to make it mandatory for vets to check microchips, I am deeply concerned—taking into account the coronavirus pandemic—that we could see a ​steep increase in healthy dogs being put to sleep across Britain in the next 12 months. We must offer these dogs a lifeline. We must make the scanning of microchips mandatory without further delay.

    My constituent, Helena Abrahams, began the campaign for Gizmo’s law in 2016 following the death of her much-loved pet in tragic circumstances. Gizmo was 15 years old and involved in a road traffic accident. Sadly, she was disposed of before anyone scanned her chip. As I mentioned earlier, dogs must be microchipped under UK law, and drivers who hit dogs on the road must report the accident under UK law. An animal rescue or vet would be informed, and the animal would be scanned and identified in order to inform the owner. But the same is not true for cats, despite being the second most popular pet in the UK. Instead, cats are often picked up from the roadside and disposed of in landfills without being reported, scanned or identified, and certainly without their owner’s knowledge. A parliamentary petition set up by the Gizmo’s law campaign and signed by over 107,000 people, entitled “New law that cats killed/injured by a vehicle are checked for a chip”, led to a Westminster Hall debate on 17 June 2019, where it received broad cross-party support. The Government response to the parliamentary petition stated:

    “We encourage microchipping of cats and it is established good practice for local authorities and the Highways Agency to scan domestic pets found on our streets so that the owner can be informed”,

    but went no further.

    As part of the Bill that I am introducing today, there would be a legal requirement for local authorities to scan the microchip of a deceased cat and then to make all reasonable efforts to contact the owner to confirm what had happened to their animal and from where they can collect the cat if they so choose. Cats could be collected from the local authority or a local vet, and there would be a further legal requirement that owners will be given seven days to recover their much-loved animals.

    Guidance would be issued by Government on good practice, and local authority employees will be required to record the chip number, the location where the cat was found, its sex, colour, colour of the collar and any owners’ details on the bag in which the body will be preserved and protected. However, we must not limit our ambition only to return microchipped cats to their owners. This Bill will further require local authority employees to provide information in line with the aforementioned guidance, together with photographs, to organisations such as Deceased Cats UK and Ireland that exist to do everything possible to return deceased cats to their owners. A register of such organisations would be provided to local authorities by the Government.

    Deceased Cats UK and Ireland was established by Helena, Wendy and all at the Gizmo’s law campaign. They worked tirelessly through their Facebook page and with an army of volunteers all over the country to reunite much-loved pets with their owners. Thanks to their efforts, working with local vets and concerned members of the public, they are able to ensure that well over 1,000 much-loved pets are returned home each year.

    Finally, I address the issue of cost. Many local authorities do not have scanners, but we have a commitment from Encore, an international pet food manufacturer, to provide ​a scanner to any council that does not have that facility, and I thank it for its generosity and commitment to animal welfare.

    We should not allow deceased cats simply to be treated as rubbish and their bodies disposed of without a thought for their owners. That is not acceptable. Through this Bill, Gizmo’s law ensures that remains are treated with respect and reflects the fact that cats are much-loved pets and companions for millions of people throughout the country.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2020 Speech on the End of the Transition Period

    Rachel Reeves – 2020 Speech on the End of the Transition Period

    The speech made by Rachel Reeves, the Labour MP for Leeds West, in the House of Commons on 23 September 2020.

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for advance sight of his statement.

    The news today that there could soon be tailbacks of 7,000 lorries in Kent is quite extraordinary. I know that the Government have said that they are committed to building new infrastructure, but I did not realise it meant concreting over the garden of England. Today’s warnings are based on a reasonable worst-case scenario, but given that we have a reasonable worst-case Government, we have to assume that these scenarios could play out quite soon.

    In their letter to the road haulage industry, the Government say that business should get ready, but what about the Government? There is a long list of promises for the future in the letter: the UK Government will be contacting haulage companies; they will be running targeted advertising; they will be publishing an updated haulier handbook; and they will launch advice stands at UK service stations. Why are these essential prerequisites for a smooth transition not already here? It is all well and good to tell businesses to act now, but without the systems in place, frankly, it is like telling me to bake a cake but forgetting to turn the oven on.

    Sectors from farming to haulage and car manufacturing are crying out for the Government to get this right. These sectors are the backbone of British industry, and they are vital to our everyday economy. If we do not listen to these experts, we will lose exports. I met the Road Haulage Association last week. It is tearing its hair out. It has since met Ministers and described that meeting as “a washout”. Frankly, this is not good enough.

    In the summer, I visited the proposed lorry park in Ashford, Kent, where construction had just begun. It was with some dismay that I later read that workmen had encountered a Saxon brick wall in their excavations. ​I hope this is not a metaphor, but can the Minister assure the House that progress there is on track? Another site apparently earmarked is in Ebbsfleet. It is currently a covid testing centre. With the test, trace and isolate system on its knees, this would be farcical if it were not so serious. Is it really too much to ask for a little bit of joined-up government from Ministers?

    On 4 September, the Government granted themselves the power to build additional lorry parks in 29 local authority areas without consulting residents. Can the Minister tell us exactly where those facilities will be? That is the least that local people deserve. Will he also tell the House how many customs agents and intermediaries are trained and in place? This is so important for the system to work.

    In the summer, the Government admitted that there would be £7 billion-worth of additional bureaucracy for UK businesses. It is the last thing they need right now, so is that still the most accurate assessment of the costs for businesses?

    It has been estimated that 10 new IT systems will be needed to make our new trading relationship with the European Union work. Can the Minister list those IT systems and guarantee that they will be in place and fully operational on 1 January? Given that we were promised a contact tracing app, first in May, then in June and then in July, and it is now September, what assurance can he give that this time the Government will deliver that vital technology and that it will be working and delivered on time? Frankly, the Government’s track record does not inspire confidence.

    We have just 100 days until the end of the transition period. Labour’s message to both sides in this negotiation is clear: stop the posturing, and start negotiating. It is in our national interest—it is in all our interests—that the Government get a deal, and get it soon, so that businesses have time to prepare. The Conservatives have had three Prime Ministers and four years since the referendum in 2016. We have seen serial incompetence and countless U-turns. I say to Ministers: get a grip on preparations, and get a grip now. The transition period comes to an end on 31 December. Will the Minister guarantee, not just to this House but to the whole country, that we will be ready?