Tag: 2023

Sarah Olney – 2023 Statement on the Minimum Energy Performance of Buildings Bill

The statement made by Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

The UK has the least energy-efficient buildings in western Europe. Millions of families are living in cold, damp homes, homes that are crying out for better insulation and for cheaper and cleaner ways of generating and retaining heat. The Government policy to upgrade our housing stock is failing badly. Homes across the UK account for 15% of greenhouse gas emissions, much of which is down to poor insulation standards and heat being paid for and then lost unnecessarily.

The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero said last week that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy had established 22 separate schemes to improve energy efficiency by the time he came to office. The majority of them have fallen far short of what is needed, wasting not only money, but precious time in the race against climate change.

While the Government have failed to improve our draughty houses, many have stepped up; I would like to pay brief tribute to the many non-governmental organisations tirelessly researching this area and lobbying the Government for change. I also thank Lord Foster of Bath and the right hon. Member for North Thanet (Sir Roger Gale) for tabling a prior version of this Bill in last year’s Session and Ron Bailey for his time and commitment to this cause. I thank Citizens Advice Richmond for inviting me into its office yesterday for a discussion about how this is one of the biggest issues facing tenants in my Richmond Park constituency.

This Bill would set out a legislative roadmap to upgrade homes to energy performance certificate band C by 2033—the minimum standard of energy efficiency that the Government’s own heat and buildings strategy has said is required. Currently, less than half of the buildings in this country meet that standard. How much longer can we kick this can down the road?

The last year has shown us all just how volatile global energy markets are. Soaring energy bills have left vulnerable households paying the price for the Government’s failure to invest in vital home improvements to reduce energy usage. A recent report by Citizens Advice found that the average tenant in a property rated D or below will pay around £350 more for their annual energy bill than someone in a better-insulated property rated C or above. For those in the least efficient homes, that increases to £950 each year.

The economic benefit of higher ratings does not stop solely with households: it is estimated that an EPC C rating could drive £12 billion of investment and save £1.75 billion annually. Not only will householders feel the benefit of improved energy efficiency in their monthly bills, but improved energy efficiency will significantly reduce damp, mould and excessive cold, all of which are detrimental to people’s health and mental wellbeing.

When I spoke to Citizens Advice Richmond yesterday I heard many examples of parents living in damp and mouldy houses and the impact that that is having on their children’s health. I heard of many cases where children are now in and out of hospital with respiratory diseases that can be directly related to the quality of the housing they are living in.

Research shows that homes in EPC bands D to G are 73% more likely to be mouldy or excessively cold than those in bands C or above. Tragically, research also shows that thousands of excess deaths each winter are directly attributable to cold and damp conditions. We must remember that those on the lowest incomes suffer most from the dangerous combination of draughty housing and soaring energy prices. That is why the Bill would put the Government’s target to upgrade all fuel-poor households to EPC rating C by 2030 on a statutory footing, placing a legal obligation on the Government to ensure that action is targeted at those who need it most.

One of the most ludicrous examples of policy failure on energy efficiency was the decision taken by the Government in 2016 to scrap the zero carbon standard for new dwellings. This means that new homes are now being built, eight years later, which will have to be upgraded again in just a few years’ time to meet EPC band C targets. A green home building programme would create thousands of new green jobs, enabling economic growth and adapting our economy to meet future challenges.

The Bill is just one step in the right direction. It would tie the Government to legally binding targets to decarbonise homes and buildings across the country. I accept that there is lots of work to be done to make those targets realistic: on developing green finance solutions, on training for suppliers, on supporting local authorities and on increasing public awareness. However, within those challenges are huge opportunities for cleaner, healthier and cheaper homes fit for the future, homes that benefit both households and the planet. I urge the Government to support the Bill today and to finally take the action that is needed.

Peter Gibson (Darlington) (Con)

The hon. Lady is making a very important speech about an issue that is very, very close to my heart. It is an issue on which I have held Westminster Hall debates, written newspaper articles and engaged with my social housing sector. Does she welcome the Government’s announcement this week of additional funding for decarbonisation in social housing? And I have a specific question for her. Where does she expect the cost of decarbonisation in private-owned non-mortgaged properties to fall?

Sarah Olney

The hon. Member makes an excellent point. The division between social and private is in many ways an obstacle to achieving our goals on this issue. In social and regulated housing, where there are opportunities perhaps to achieve economies of scale, certainly in whole blocks or whole estates of housing, a lot can be done, but obviously those opportunities are more challenging where private property is concerned. What we need is a range of innovative solutions in the private sector.

Robin Millar (Aberconwy) (Con)

This is a fascinating debate, which I have followed. It has been brought to my attention by land and property holders in my constituency who have a large portfolio of listed and conservation buildings. The Bill drives them into a difficult place. On the one hand, there is a drive to increase efficiency. On the other hand, they are confronted by planning rules which prevent easy modification and adaptation of the structure to, for example, accommodate solar panels. Is the hon. Lady arguing that we should move to an easing of planning regulation to allow efficiency improvements in listed and conservation building stock?

Sarah Olney

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. It is a live issue in my own constituency, he will be pleased to hear. We have conservation areas where people are keen to put solar panels on their roofs and it is possible on one side of the street but not on the other because of the impact on the streetscape. I very much urge local authorities—or whatever the planning authority is; it will be different in different parts—to look at that particular issue. We need to explore and weigh up the gain both for society at large and for individual householders. It will be different in different places. In some cases, it is about how the street looks, what people want to preserve and whether adjustments can be made. In other examples, the fabric of the building itself will need to be preserved.

Before I came into this place in 2019, I was the financial accountant for Historic Royal Palaces. My old office was right in the middle of Hampton Court Palace, so a lot of these issues around fabric of the building are very close to my heart. Interestingly, there is no better place to be on a very, very hot summer’s day than right in the middle of a Tudor palace, with six-foot thick stone walls. I can confirm that it is just about the best possible natural cooling one can have.

Robin Millar

The hon. Lady is being generous with her time. We have much in common in our interest in and passion for old buildings. In fact, I came across the statistic that some 95% of conservation and listed buildings are still expected to be in use in 100 years’ time. That creates incredible economic pressure on the market to ensure that efficiencies are delivered, at incredible cost. I ask again, where do we think that cost might be addressed? Is she arguing for an easing of those conservation rules to reduce the cost on that particular sector of conservation and listed buildings?

Sarah Olney

I was coming to the point about the cost, which was raised by the hon. Member for Darlington (Peter Gibson). We need to rebalance and grasp the importance of energy efficiency right now. It is not just about climate change or fuel bills; it is about health and wellbeing, often of the very poorest in our society—if the hon. Member for Aberconwy (Robin Millar) will forgive me, they are probably less concerned about historic buildings. I mentioned Citizens Advice Richmond; one of its observations is that it is frequently the buildings built in the 1960s and 1970s where they find the most problems with damp and mould.

I fear that we are getting distracted by some of the more minor concerns, when the issue is about the bulk of our housing stock—particularly the housing stock that our most vulnerable and low-income citizens live in—and what we can do. I want to pick up the point about where the cost will come from. Where it is an individual household and it is their responsibility, I want the Government to produce some clearer strategies about how the problem will be tackled. The private sector will then have more incentive to offer competitive options on things such as heat pumps, roof insulation and cavity wall insulation. We need a bigger take-up of those things to create a competitive market, but some of that has to come from the Government taking a lead in the sorts of strategies and products that householders might be tempted to take up.

Peter Gibson

The hon. Lady has been gracious in giving way once again, given the shortage of time. This issue is serious one for property owners. Having had a solid-wall property dry lined and insulated against a solid wall, I have seen the costs myself. Does she agree that it is incumbent on mortgage companies to develop a range of products that would help new homebuyers buying second-hand, older properties, to build in some sort of loan facility to enable such works to be undertaken?

Sarah Olney

The hon. Member is right. The sort of innovative products we are looking for are not just construction products, but financial products. Again, it is about opening up a private sector, competitive and well-regulated market that will enable homeowners to make the kind of investments that they will need to make in their own homes. The hon. Member is absolutely right at this time of heightened property values—again, a live issue in my constituency. I saw a league table recently in which Richmond Park is No. 6 for average property prices out of all the constituencies in the country. It costs a great deal already to live in Richmond Park. He is absolutely right that if we want to put an onus on homeowners to upgrade the quality of the properties that they are living in or renting out to other people, we need to offer them options for how they might finance that.

Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)

As a fellow London MP, the hon. Lady will recognise the pressures that have been highlighted. But there are parts of the market that are doing that organically already and have not required state intervention. Where there is state intervention, whether national or local, does she agree that it is important that trust is ensured? She may be aware of cases in her constituency of major doubts about the effectiveness of the Mayor of London’s solar scheme. People have signed up for the rollout of solar panels and have paid thousands of pounds, and that has not been delivered.

Sarah Olney

I confess I have not had a huge amount of casework on the solar panel issue. One case was raised with me but specifically on my earlier point about the conservation area. The hon. Member raises a good point about solar panels. I do not know why—a lot of people are asking this—we have not had a more extensive rollout of solar panels already, regardless of whether they are funded by the Mayor of London or anyone else. It is of huge benefit to homeowners to be able to install solar panels and participate in generating their own power and electricity. We really need to look at which policies are stopping people investing in solar panels, and what financial obstacles we may be able to overcome. This is not just about energy efficiency in insulating our homes, but about what more can be done to help people with the cost of fuel bills and keeping their homes warm, and about the health and wellbeing of the nation as a whole.

The Deputy Speaker interrupted the business (Standing Order No. 11(2)).

Bill to be read a Second time on Friday 24 November.

April 6, 2023
Edward Argar – 2023 Speech on the Firearms Bill

The speech made by Edward Argar, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Justice, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Dr Mullan) for so ably stepping in for my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West (Shaun Bailey), who has done so much work to bring forward this private Member’s Bill and to see it progress through the House. My hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich did an admirable job of picking up the reins and deftly steering the Bill through Third Reading. This important and proportionate measure will help to advance safety while allowing legitimate activities to continue.

As always, the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard), approaches the Bill in a pragmatic and sensible way. He highlighted the horrendous events in 2021 that saw the killing of five people in his constituency, and I pay tribute to him for the phenomenal support he gave to his affected constituents and to his community in the light of those horrific events.

As the hon. Gentleman said, he will shortly be seeing the Policing Minister, on whose behalf I am responding today. In respect of the inquest findings following the horrific events in his constituency, I believe that the Policing Minister is committed to respond within 60 days, which according to my calculation brings us to mid-May. It is right for those findings to be considered carefully and properly, and, while I do not wish to pre-empt what the Minister will say, I know that he will indeed be considering them very carefully.

I am happy to confirm that the Government support the Bill, which has been the subject of consensus across the House. It aims to address two vulnerabilities in the existing licensing controls, which have been debated in a commendably constructive way during its passage so far, here and in Committee. We committed ourselves to taking action following a public consultation on specific firearms safety issues that took place between 24 November 2020 and 16 February 2021.

Clause 1 tightens the law relating to miniature rifle ranges by removing the exemption, provided by the Firearms Act 1968, that has allowed those operating such ranges to do so without the necessity of first obtaining a firearm certificate. Removing that exemption will mean that the operators will be subject to police checks ensuring that the ranges operate within a secure and safe framework, and that the firearms used there are stored securely. The Home Office will amend its guidance to reflect the fact that the operation of a miniature rifle range constitutes a good reason for possessing suitable firearms and ammunition, which I hope provides the reassurance sought by some Members on this point during earlier debates. The clause also means that the .22 rim-fire rifles used on miniature rifle ranges—a type of firearm that is already subject to licensing by police in other circumstances—will rightly be brought within the licensing regime for miniature rifle ranges. Furthermore, the term “miniature rifles” will be more tightly defined so that only the less powerful .22 rim-fire firearms may be used on miniature rifle ranges.

Clause 2 tackles the unlawful manufacture of ammunition by introducing a new offence of possessing component parts with the intent to assemble unauthorised quantities of complete ammunition. The police had raised concerns that the component parts of ammunition were too easy to obtain, and were being used by criminals to manufacture whole rounds. I know there has been concern about the possibility that this is a back-door way of introducing controls on component parts, or that it will somehow prevent people from home loading their own ammunition. I hope it has been made sufficiently clear in our previous debates that someone with a valid certificate covering the complete rounds they possess will have nothing to fear, and that the measure is aimed at the criminals who seek to manufacture ammunition illegally. Concerns have also been raised—and were touched on by the shadow Minister—about clause 2 not extending to 3D printed ammunition. I hope it will reassure Members to know that such 3D printed items are subject to the law in the same way as any other firearm or ammunition. The fact that a 3D printer may have been used to make ammunition illegally could also be used in proving intent to a court.

Both those measures received support in the public consultation that I mentioned earlier. It was widely acknowledged, by those representing shooting interests as well as those who wish to see tighter firearms controls more generally, that these changes would help to strengthen our firearms controls. The Bill will make a valuable contribution to firearms legislation while also ensuring that those who wish to continue to engage in firearms activities legitimately—whether that involves target shooting at clubs or activity centres, the legitimate home loading of ammunition, or other lawful activities—can continue to do so.

Law enforcement agencies called on the Government to tighten the regulation in these areas and we have responded, but our work in keeping firearms law under review—another issue on which the shadow Minister sought assurances—and continuing to ensure that there are strong gun controls in this country does not stop here. A number of other issues that have rightly been raised during the Bill’s passage are out of scope, but the Government will continue to consider them closely in the context of the reports that have been received about the tragic shootings in various parts of the UK in recent months.

Let me end by thanking, in absentia, my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West for bringing the Bill to the House, and my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich and the shadow Minister for the tone in which, as ever, they have approached this issue. I also put on record my thanks to the Home Office officials who have worked with Ministers in responding to and working on this piece of legislation, and to officials in my own private office in the Ministry of Justice—one of my private secretaries is sitting in the box as we speak—for the speed with which, in recent hours, they have made sure I am fully briefed for this debate. I hope to see the Bill continue to progress through Parliament apace; I look forward to its having a smooth and swift passage through the other place and into law and I fully support what is proposed.

Dr Mullan

With the leave of the House, on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West (Shaun Bailey), I would like to thank the Clerks, the members of the Bill Committee, House staff and all of those who have contributed to the Bill. My hon. Friend wanted me to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd South (Simon Baynes), and I want to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) for his considered questions today. It has been a privilege to play a small role on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West to bring this legislation through this stage in the House. I thank the whole House for its support.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.

April 6, 2023
PRESS RELEASE : Time set for UK Emergency Alerts test [April 2023]
The press release issued by the Cabinet Office on 6 April 2023.

National test of Emergency Alerts will take place at 3pm on Sunday 23 April.
Message will be received on 4G and 5G mobile phones, along with sound and vibration for up to 10 seconds

Emergency Alerts enable urgent messages to be broadcast to a defined area when there is an imminent risk to life, such as wildfires or severe flooding

Brings UK in line with other countries such as the US and Canada who use the system

A UK-wide of the life-saving public Emergency Alerts system will take place at 3pm on Sunday 23 April.

Following successful pilots in East Suffolk and Reading, the test of the new Emergency Alerts system will see people receive a message on the home screen of their mobile phone, along with a sound and vibration for up to ten seconds.

For the test, the public does not need to take any action – the sound and vibration will stop automatically after ten seconds. All people need to do is swipe away the message or click ‘OK’ on their phone’s home screen – just like for a ‘low battery’ warning or notification – and continue to use their phone as normal.

Emergency Alerts have already been used successfully in a number of other countries, including the US, Canada, the Netherlands and Japan, where it has been widely credited with saving lives, for example, during severe weather events. In the UK, alerts could be used to tell residents of villages being encroached by wildfires, or of severe flooding.

The Government has worked together with the emergency services and partners, including the Football Association and London Marathon, to make sure the national test has minimum impact on major events taking place on the day.

Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Oliver Dowden MP, said:

Put the date in your diaries – at 3pm on 23 April, we’ll be testing our new national Emergency Alerts system.

Getting this system operational with the national test means we have another tool in our toolkit to keep the public safe in life-threatening emergencies. It could be the sound that saves your life.

Chair of The National Fire Chiefs Council, Mark Hardingham, said:

We must use every tool at our disposal to keep people safe, and we need everyone to play their part – and the new Emergency Alerts system is one way we can do this. For 10 seconds, the national test may be inconvenient for some, but please forgive us for the intrusion, because the next time you hear it – your life, and the life-saving actions of our emergency services, could depend on it.

National Police Chiefs’ Council Lead for Civil Contingencies, Assistant Chief Constable Owen Weatherill said:

Warning and informing the public at speed during times of crises can be vital. We look forward to further developing the use of the Emergency Alerts capability and how it can have real benefits for the public to protect and preserve life, as well as supporting policing’s wider response to critical incidents with partner agencies. Alongside partners, we will continue to listen carefully to public feedback and ensure the use of Emergency Alerts has a positive impact.

Emergency Alerts will transform the UK’s warning and informing capability; by working with mobile broadcasting technology it will provide a means to get urgent messages quickly to nearly 90 percent of mobile phones in a defined area when there is a risk to life, and provide clear instructions about how best to respond.

Best practice of Emergency Alerts in other countries have shown that they work more effectively in a real emergency if people have previously received a test, so they know what an alert looks and sounds like.

The system will be used very rarely – only being sent where there is an immediate risk to people’s lives – so people may not receive an alert for months or years.

You can find out further information on Emergency Alerts, including what they look and sound like at gov.uk/alerts
April 6, 2023

PRESS RELEASE : Nearly £50 million boost for safer roads across England [April 2023]

The press release issued by the Department for Transport on 6 April 2023.

Road safety improvements will be made to 27 of the most high-risk roads in England, which will help prevent fatal and serious injuries.

£47.5 million government investment to improve safety of 27 of the country’s most dangerous roads
from the Isle of Wight to Newcastle, road users across England will benefit from road safety improvements with 50% funding uplift
investment will prevent over 750 fatal and serious injuries over the next 20 years, with £420 million benefit to society

Drivers, passengers and cyclists across England will benefit from a £47.5 million injection into enhancing the safety of some of the most high-risk roads in England, the Department for Transport confirmed today (6 April 2023).

Through the third round of the Safer Roads Fund, 27 new schemes will be delivered, benefiting road users around the country by driving forward safety improvements such as:

re-designing junctions
improving signage and road markings

The programme will reduce the risk of collisions which will in turn reduce congestion, journey times and emissions.

As part of the fund, government is continuing to deliver a wide range of improvements across all roads, while working with local authorities and safety groups.

To date, £100 million has been provided through the programme to improve the 50 most dangerous roads in England, the majority of which are rural roads.

Some of the improvements already made include improved signage, safer pedestrian crossings and better designed junctions.

Transport Secretary Mark Harper said:

Britain’s roads are some of the safest in the world, but we are always looking at ways to help keep drivers and all road users safe.

We’re injecting £47.5 million so that local councils around the country have the support they need to keep everyone safe, while reducing congestion and emissions and supporting local economies.

The allocation of £47.5 million to 27 different schemes has been based on data independently surveyed and provided by the Road Safety Foundation. The data analysed is based on a road safety risk, looking at data on those killed and seriously injured alongside traffic levels.

The previous rounds of the Safer Roads Fund programme focused on treating the 50 highest-risk local ‘A road’ sections in England with enhanced road safety engineering interventions. The scheme is set to prevent around 1,450 fatal and serious injuries over the next 20 years.

According to Road Safety Foundation analysis, early estimates suggest that the £47.5 million investment should prevent around 760 fatal and serious injuries over the next 20 years, with a benefit to society of £420 million.

Once the whole life costs are factored in for the schemes, the overall benefit cost ratio of the investment is estimated at 7.4, meaning for every £1 invested the societal benefit would be £7.40.

Dr Suzy Charman, Executive Director of the Road Safety Foundation said:

The commitment and funding announced today is transformational for road safety teams in local authorities across the country. It will allow them to proactively reduce risk and make these 27 roads safer and more inviting for all road users.

Systematic changes have already had a big impact on road death and serious injury, for example seatbelts and airbags protect lives when crashes happen. In the same way we can design roads safely so when crashes occur, people can walk away. This can be done by clearing or protecting roadsides, putting in cross hatchings to add space between vehicles which provides safer junctions like roundabouts, or adding signalisation and / or turning pockets, and including facilities for walking and cycling.

This additional investment builds on the government’s plans to recruit a specialised team of inspectors to build the country’s first ever Road Safety Investigation Branch. The team will look at how and why incidents happen and build an enhanced understanding of how we can better mitigate collisions.

It also follows the actions government has already taken to improve road safety, including:

banning any use of handheld mobile phones behind the wheel
updating the Highway Code to introduce a hierarchy of road users, which places road users most at risk in the event of a collision at the top of the hierarchy

The 27 schemes receiving funding from the Safer Roads Fund 3 are:

Road	Local authority	Funding
A586	Blackpool Council	£1,000,000
A35	Bournemouth Borough Council	£1,890,625
A2010	Brighton and Hove City Council	£600,000
A52	Derby City	£475,000
A104	Essex County Council	£1,360,000
A35	Hampshire County Council	£6,040,000
A5183	Hertfordshire County Council	£1,800,000
A165	Hull City Council	£2,990,625
A3056	Isle of Wight Council	£2,140,000
A5105	Lancashire County Council	£920,000
A5038	Liverpool City Council	£859,375
A186	Newcastle Upon Tyne City Council	£3,650,000
A6130	Nottingham City Council	£950,000
A609	Nottingham City Council	£475,000
A4158	Oxfordshire County Council	£800,000
A4165	Oxfordshire County Council	£875,000
A2047	Portsmouth City Council	£1,300,000
A6022	Rotherham Metro. Borough Council	£750,000
A6042	Salford City Council	£743,750
A4030	Sandwell Metro. Borough Council	£750,000
A625	Sheffield City Council	£1,425,000
A3025	Southampton City Council	£875,000
A13	Southend-on-Sea Council	£3,425,000
A1156	Suffolk County Council	£1,275,000
A25	Surrey County Council	£1,800,000
A439	Warwickshire County Council	£1,320,000
A3102	Wiltshire Council	£6,980,000

Total: £47,569,375

April 6, 2023

PRESS RELEASE : Vessel to accommodate migrants [April 2023]

The press release issued by the Home Office on 5 April 2023.

The Home Office has announced that a barge in Portland Port, Dorset, will accommodate migrants.

A berthed vessel will, for the first time, accommodate asylum seekers in the UK. It will reduce the reliance on expensive hotels and deliver a more orderly, cost effective and sustainable asylum accommodation system.

Today (Wednesday 5 April), the Home Office has announced that an accommodation barge in Portland Port, Dorset will be used to reduce the unsustainable pressure on the UK’s asylum system and cut the cost to the taxpayer caused by the significant increase in Channel crossings. Currently hotel accommodation for asylum seekers is costing £6 million a day.

This is an important step in progressing the Prime Minister and Home Secretary’s priority to stop the boats. Last week the government announced that surplus military sites will also be used to accommodate migrants who have entered the UK illegally on small boats. This is part of the wider efforts to secure alternative, more appropriate accommodation than expensive hotels. This comes alongside the return of the landmark Illegal Migration Bill, which is designed to stop the Channel crossings by ending illegal entry to the UK and ensuring that those who do come here illegally will be detained and swiftly removed.

The barge, called the Bibby Stockholm, will be berthed in Portland Port and will accommodate about 500 single adult males whilst their asylum claims are processed. It will provide basic and functional accommodation, and healthcare provision, catering facilities and 24/7 security will be in place on board, to minimise the disruption to local communities. People whose claims are refused and have exhausted their appeal rights will be removed from the UK.

The use of vessels for accommodation brings the UK in line with other countries around Europe, for example in the Netherlands where migrants have successfully been accommodated on vessels. The Scottish Government have also used vessels for Ukrainian refugees.

Migrants are due to be moved onto the Bibby Stockholm in the coming months. The Home Office is in discussions with other ports and further vessels will be announced in due course.

Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick said:

The Home Secretary and I have been clear that the use of expensive hotels to house those making unnecessary and dangerous journeys must stop. We will not elevate the interests of illegal migrants over the British people we are elected to serve.

We have to use alternative accommodation options, as our European neighbours are doing – including the use of barges and ferries to save the British taxpayer money and to prevent the UK becoming a magnet for asylum shoppers in Europe.

All accommodation will meet our legal obligations and we will work closely with the local community to address their concerns, including through financial support.

Chief Executive of Portland Port, Bill Reeves, said:

We are keen to play our part in the national effort to house some of the thousands of people needing accommodation.

We encourage everyone in the community to approach this with an open mind and help us show other areas just how successful this type of initiative can be, both for the migrants and the local community.

There will be close co-operation with local agencies, including the health and emergency services during the preparations for the vessel’s arrival and its operation. We will also work closely with local community and voluntary groups.

Bibby Stockholm will be operational for at least 18 months and stay berthed in the port during that time.

Use of alternative accommodation such as vessels are not only more cost effective than hotels, but they are more manageable and orderly for communities and offers employment opportunities in the broader area to support the vessel.

We are working closely with Portland Port, the local authority and key partners to make sure appropriate arrangements are in place, including liaising with local police.

The government recognises that using alternative sites and vessels involves difficult decisions, but urgent action is needed to reduce expensive hotel use, with the sites providing much needed accommodation.

April 6, 2023
Luke Pollard – 2023 Speech on the Firearms Bill

The speech made by Luke Pollard, the Labour MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.

I thank the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Dr Mullan) for moving the Bill’s Third Reading today, and the hon. Member for Clwyd South (Simon Baynes) for taking it through Committee.

I rise to speak in support of the Bill, which will make small but important changes to our gun laws. As the MP for the constituency that suffered the tragedy of losing five people in the mass shooting in Keyham of August 2021, I am very mindful that in approaching gun legislation we should all do our best to prevent future tragedies, close loopholes and ensure that the pain and suffering that my community has felt is not felt by others. The Bill will make small but important changes in that direction.

In Committee, Opposition Members made the case that although closing these two loopholes is welcome, it shows that yet again we are making ad hoc changes to gun legislation. There may be a stronger case for a broader review of gun laws, in particular to look at updating the Firearms Act 1968 to ensure that our gun legislation takes 21st-century conditions into account and keeps people safe based on modern rather than historic practices and uses.

The Bill is narrow and I will constrain my remarks to its provisions. It will clamp down on existing loopholes related to miniature rifles. As the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich said, the word “miniature” might misleadingly suggest that they are somehow toys or that they are less serious, but .22 rifles are still weapons and should be controlled with appropriate scrutiny of those who apply for a certificate, as well as those without a certificate, as the Bill seeks to address.

Clause 1 will make limited changes to the 1968 Act by introducing a requirement for operators of miniature rifle ranges to obtain a firearm certificate and by restricting such ranges to .22 weapons only—a welcome change that the Opposition think is a good idea. Clause 2 will introduce a new offence of possessing component parts of ammunition with intent to manufacture. The Bill follows the publication of the firearms safety consultation, which sought views on improving the controls on miniature rifle ranges. 73% of those who responded to the survey agreed or strongly agreed

“that the operator of a miniature rifle range should be required to hold a firearms certificate”.

Labour broadly supports the Bill, but we stress that the legislation should go further. In Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Holly Lynch) spoke of her conversations with police officers, who told her that miniature rifles have been adapted into more dangerous weapons and used to facilitate criminality. It was felt that the requirement for someone operating a miniature rifle range to apply for a firearms certificate should be accompanied by further conditions in recognition of the fact that they are running such an establishment rather than simply possessing a firearm. It was also felt that the running of the range should be subject to routine checks on compliance, but that is missing from clauses 1 and 2.

We need our gun laws to be fit for the 21st century. That means recognising that the 1968 Act is out of date and that the body of assembled gun law changes since the Act could be consolidated to ensure that they are fit for modern challenges. An example relevant to clause 2 is the 3D printing of ammunition and firearms, which was briefly mentioned in Committee. At the moment, 3D printing is used mainly for handguns. Designs can be downloaded freely from the internet, so someone with a 3D printer can print a handgun and other kinds of weaponry. That fundamentally changes criminals’ ability to get their hands on firearms and evade the licensing system. It is also possible for them to print elements of ammunition that fit the gun. The casing is explicitly identified as a component part of ammunition in proposed new section 3A(2)(b) of the 1968 Act, which is set out in clause 2.

It does not appear to me that clause 2 explicitly covers 3D printing. When pressed on this in Committee, the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, the hon. Member for Derbyshire Dales (Miss Dines), was not able to provide an answer. I realise the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, the right hon. Member for Charnwood (Edward Argar), who is at the Dispatch Box today, is not responsible for the day-to-day handling of the Bill, but I would be grateful if he could pass my concerns to his officials. If we face a growth in the 3D printing of weapons, which is a genuine risk both in the future and now, we must make sure that the provision of a 3D printer could fall under the same type of offence as suggested in clause 2.

Last week I met Emma Ambler, who lost her twin sister Kelly Fitzgibbons, and Kelly’s two children, to a gun incident. I often speak about Keyham in this place, but it is important to recognise that, around the country, we are seeing people lose loved ones in a variety of circumstances due to firearms, but also due to failures in how firearms certificates and firearms licensing are delivered.

I share the concern of the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) to ensure that responsible gun owners are able to possess a weapon. Making sure that only appropriate individuals have access to a weapon must be at the heart of our approach to gun laws. Sadly, we have seen police forces, including Devon and Cornwall police in my area, fail catastrophically to ensure that only those who should have a gun certificate have one. It is welcome that the Bill extends the provisions to .22 rifles, but wherever a police force is investigating an individual’s suitability, we must make sure that not only are the proper procedures followed but that the same procedures are followed across the nation.

After the Plymouth inquest, the coroner made a number of remarks in this direction. One recommendation was for the introduction of national training for all police officers involved with firearms licensing, to ensure that the regulation of firearms is the same in every part of the country. That is important when looking to extend the provision of firearms licensing, as we are with this Bill, to make sure that, whether it is Devon and Cornwall police, the Metropolitan police or any other police force in England and Wales, the provisions are the same so that we avoid the loss of life we saw in Plymouth and in relation to Kelly Fitzgibbons and her family.

We accept that, due to the nature of this Bill, the Government are not minded to make broader changes at this time, but we are encouraged that there is an appetite to close the loopholes, as identified with .22 rifles in this private Member’s Bill. I encourage the Government to go further. I look forward to meeting the Policing Minister next week with the families of those we sadly lost in the Keyham tragedy in 2021, to make the case for closing further loopholes on a comprehensive basis to ensure that our gun laws in the 21st century keep all our communities safe.

Labour will back this Bill today, and we hope it further reinforces the need to go further to ensure that all our communities remain safe from gun violence.

April 5, 2023
PRESS RELEASE : Proposed measures to strengthen UK fuel supply chain [April 2023]
The press release issued by the Department for Transport on 5 April 2023.

Have your say on increasing the weight limit for fuel tankers.
- new proposals considered for fuel tankers to operate at full capacity, securing the supply of fuel to UK forecourts and depots
- consultation will ensure constant fuel supply at forecourts without adding larger tankers on roads
- follows continued action to bolster supply chains and keep the country moving
The government is consulting on whether fuel tankers should be allowed to carry more fuel in a move designed to further strengthen the UK’s fuel supply chain.

Have your say on increasing the weight limit for fuel tankers.

The consultation launched today (5 April 2023), will explore whether fuel tankers will be allowed to carry more fuel in the eventuality of disruption to the fuel supply chain to help ensure car, bus and lorry drivers can always fill up with confidence.

Most fuel tankers operate with spare tank capacity due to the existing 44 tonne weight limit. The potential to allow tankers to operate to their full design train weight could increase the efficiency of the fuel supply chain by approximately 6%.

The measure would enable more fuel to be carried using the same vehicles, helping to safeguard a strong fuel supply chain as the government continues to grow the economy.

Roads Minister Richard Holden said:

Thanks to the government’s bold measures to support the sector, our country has now an even stronger haulage supply chain.

We will continue to work with and listen to the sector to ensure our forecourts are always well stocked and motorists can fill up with confidence.

Safety will be at the heart of the consultation, and any increase in fuel capacity would apply only to fuel tankers equipped with appropriate safety features, such as vehicle stability functionality and advanced emergency braking systems.

Routes to be used by these heavier tankers would have to be agreed in advance to ensure the road infrastructure can accommodate the fuel tankers operating at full capacity.

An assessment of the proposals by National Highways indicates that the increase in safety risks would be extremely small and any risk of infrastructure damage would be effectively managed.

This follows the government’s 33 actions already taken to tackle the HGV driver shortage and to protect the supply chain. This included;
- making 11,000 HGV driver training places available through Skills Bootcamps
- injecting a major and sustained boost to the number of HGV driver tests available
- investing £52.5 million in improvements in roadside facilities and lorry parking
As a result, new HGV drivers are taking and passing their driving test in record numbers. Between March 2022 and May 2022, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) carried out 29,384 HGV tests – 54% more than the corresponding period in 2019 before the pandemic.
April 5, 2023
PRESS RELEASE : UK Government publishes draft proposals for new border controls [April 2023]
The press release issued by the Cabinet Office on 5 April 2023.

The UK Government, in collaboration with the Scottish and Welsh Governments, has published its plan to strengthen our borders against biosecurity threats and illegal imports.
- Draft Border Target Operating Model sets out proposals for a new world-class border system to provide protection from security and biosecurity threats
- Government will engage with industry for six weeks before publishing final version later this year
- Model is backed by over a £1 billion investment in border transformation across this spending review period
The UK Government, in collaboration with the Scottish and Welsh Governments, has today (5 April) published its plan to strengthen our borders against biosecurity threats and illegal imports. The draft Border Target Operating Model sets out a plan to realise the ambition of the 2025 Border Strategy to create the most effective border in the world.

The draft has been devised following extensive engagement with the Border Industry and businesses across the UK. A six week engagement period will now take place, with the final Target Operating Model to be published later this year.

The border transformation is backed by over a £1 billion investment across this spending review period, to improve how government systems and technology support the movement of goods and people across the border.

The proposed new model will prevent delays at the border through a reduction in the need for physical checks for many types of goods, and by ensuring that checks take place away from ports where this is needed to allow traffic to flow freely.

The proposals in the Target Operating Model apply to imports from all countries. These controls will ensure our environment is protected, deliver food that is safe to eat whilst maintaining security of supply for consumers, and disrupt criminal activity before it can harm our communities.

Biosecurity is vital in an increasingly uncertain world and the full controls will mean that we can protect ourselves against known and unknown threats. The controls will protect consumers, businesses, and the economy as a whole against disease threats such as African Swine Fever and Xylella.

The proposed Target Operating Model secures Great Britain’s borders against such threats while making it as easy as possible to do business. To limit the burden on businesses, our new proposed risk-based global model will use data and technology to simplify and streamline import trade processes.

Central to this proposed model is the new Single Trade Window, delivered from 2023 to be fully operational by 2027. This technology will streamline processes for traders, who will only need to submit information once and in one place.

The government will also test further simplified processes by piloting an ambitious programme of trusted trader assurance schemes.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe, Minister of State at the Cabinet Office, said:

The publication of our draft Border Target Operating Model is a huge step forward for the safety, security and efficiency of our borders. Our proposals strike a balance between giving consumers and businesses confidence while reducing the costs and friction for businesses, which in turn will help to grow the economy.

Biosecurity Minister Lord Benyon said:

It is vital that we have strong border controls in place. Invasive diseases could cost our farms and businesses billions of pounds, threaten our food safety and break confidence in UK exports around the world. That is why we are working hand in glove with businesses to devise a strong system that works for the nation.

Amanda Francis, Chief Executive of the Association of International Courier & Express Services, said:

International express operators support the Government’s plans to improve efficiencies at the border to ease the flow of goods and minimise costs of trade for UK businesses. We particularly welcome the proportionate risk based approach this draft Target Operating Model adopts and the proposals to reduce the data requirements for safety and security and allow the use of Transit Security Accompanying Documents. We hope to work with Government to implement these proposals and look at other areas of simplification building on a trusted operator approach.

Gavin Stedman, Port Health & Public Protection Director at London Port Health Authority said:

We welcome the publication of the TOM which will provide the basis for consistent risk based checks across EU and non-EU trade. The establishment of a dynamic and flexible system will afford greater efficiency and transparency allowing us to be more responsive to demands, thus balancing biosecurity and trade needs at our borders.

William Bain, Head of Trade Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said:

The BCC is a big believer in the shift to a digital trade system. If it is done properly then smaller firms will see benefits when it comes to importing goods into Great Britain.

Providing certainty for business is crucial and the focus must now be on delivering to the timescales set out. This will need a concerted effort to get the physical and digital infrastructure in place.

It is then vital that companies, here and across the world, involved in sourcing and supply chains, are properly prepared for these changes and the introduction of new trusted trader arrangements.

We look forward to working closely with the UK Government and businesses over the coming months to make sure this switchover runs as smoothly as possible.

A spokesperson for the Fresh Produce Consortium said:

The Fresh Produce Consortium supports the long-awaited publication of the draft Border Target Operating Model. The UK Government is taking its opportunity to implement a world leading, least-cost border solution. We will work with the UK Government to facilitate responsible companies in the fresh produce, flower and plant sector to utilise their expertise to best effect to maximise efficiency, food safety and biosecurity.
April 5, 2023
Deidre Brock – 2023 Parliamentary Question on the Devolution Settlement

The parliamentary question asked by Deidre Brock, the SNP MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, in the House of Commons on 29 March 2023.

Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)

1. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904292)

Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey) (SNP)

6. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904297)

Chris Law (Dundee West) (SNP)

7. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the operation of the devolution settlement. (904298)

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Alister Jack)

I take this opportunity to congratulate Humza Yousaf on becoming Scotland’s new First Minister. I look forward to working with him. I heard him say that he wanted to put the independence drive into “fifth gear”; I would gently remind him that most Scots actually want him to put it into reverse and to work with the United Kingdom to tackle the issues that really matter to them, such as cost of living pressures and growing our economy.

The devolution settlement gives Scotland the best of both worlds. Scotland benefits from the wide influence and economic strength of the UK, while also enjoying considerable devolved powers in vital areas such as health, education and justice to tailor policies to meet the needs of people in Scotland.

Deidre Brock

In his response to the hon. Member for Blaydon (Liz Twist) on 22 February, the Secretary of State claimed that the Scottish Government had not asked for an exemption from the UK Internal Market Act 2020 for the Scottish deposit return scheme. The Scottish Government have since published the timeline to show that that is incorrect and that the proposal has been under detailed discussion within the resources and waste common framework since last October, with the final detailed case for exclusion presented on 13 February. In the light of that, will he correct the record and apologise for inadvertently misleading Parliament?

Mr Jack

This is an important point and has had a lot of airtime in the media in Scotland. I can say to the hon. Lady that, while officials and civil servants spoke to one another over a period of time, the official request to Ministers came in the inter-ministerial group meeting, which the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, my hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) was at, on 6 March. That is all minuted. It is a fact, it is on the record and there is no question. The UK Government have published it. The official request was on 6 March. I would also say that the Scottish Government proceeded with a deposit return scheme that small businesses, consumers and others are very concerned about. Even the chief executive of Tesco, the UK’s largest retailer, said yesterday that it is not the right scheme and it is not fit for purpose. They are concerned about it and they are right to be concerned about it. The Scottish Government asked for their UKIM exemption after they put their scheme together. If I were building a house, I would get planning permission and then build my house, not do it the other way around.

Drew Hendry

The Secretary of State knows that the process for gaining an exemption to the United Kingdom Internal Market Act is through developing the appropriate common framework. He also stated that there had been no request by letter from the Scottish Government, yet the Deputy First Minister wrote to the UK Government on 31 January and even received a positive reply on 10 February. Is the problem here that the Secretary of State just has a very selective memory, or is it that he is so busy preparing for his seat in the House of Lords that his office does not bother keeping him in the loop any more?

Mr Jack

Let us be absolutely clear about this: the letter the hon. Gentleman refers to was a letter to the Chancellor about value added tax treatment of the deposit return scheme. The letter mentioned that an exemption request would be coming forward, but the official request was made on 6 March—there is no question about that—and the detailed arguments were laid out on 6 March at the ministerial meeting.

Chris Law

It is not going too well for the Secretary of State, is it? Environmental charities across these islands have written to him, calling on him not to block the Scottish deposit return scheme. We know there are successful schemes across many other countries, and the British Soft Drinks Association, whose members include Coca-Cola and Irn-Bru maker A.G. Barr, called for it to go ahead as planned. What on earth is the future Baron von Jack thinking of when he ignores those calls and threatens to block the scheme—particularly when his own Government and other UK nations will follow Scotland’s lead and introduce their own scheme from 2025?

Mr Jack

I am not sure that there has been much joined-up thinking on the questions here. Again, I have suggested that the deposit return scheme should be paused. I think a UK-wide solution is right; I think recycling is absolutely right. But I agree with the chief executive of Tesco, Britain’s largest retailer, when he says that this is not the right scheme—it will be inflationary. As I have said before at this Dispatch Box, 12 bottles of Scottish water currently cost £1.59 in Aldi, but under the scheme, that would become £3.99 or even higher if a price is put on top. Although £2.40 of that could be reclaimed, the consumer will also pay an extra cost that is put on by the producer—producers have been clear about that.

We met Coca-Cola, which said that 2p on a can and 5p on a bottle would be passed on to the consumer and could not be reclaimed. There are higher figures from other companies, including one small brewer that said it would have to add £1.40 to a bottle of beer on top of the 20 pence. The scheme is inflationary and very bad for the consumer’s shopping basket. That is why I think we need to pause it and get a scheme that works for the whole United Kingdom.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

I call David Mundell.

David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)

What a pleasure it is to see you in the Chair for Scottish questions, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I add my congratulations to Humza Yousaf on becoming First Minister of Scotland, and I recognise the inclusive and historic nature of his appointment. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, based on the experience of our constituents, Mr Yousaf will have to up his game considerably in his new role? As Transport Minister, he came to Dumfries in 2016 to hold a transport summit, and seven years later, precisely zero of the commitments given that day have been delivered.

Mr Jack

Not only did Humza Yousaf fail in the transport brief but, as we know from his opponent, who took almost half the vote—48%—he also failed in his other briefs of justice and health.

Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)

I join others in congratulating the new First Minister. The Barnett formula by which money is devolved to Scotland has existed for more than 40 years. Has the Secretary of State received any representations from the Scottish Government about reviewing that formula?

Mr Jack

At the moment, we are in discussions with the Scottish Government about a review of the fiscal framework. That review has been in train for some time, and the conclusions will be coming shortly.

Robin Millar (Aberconwy) (Con)

I, too, congratulate Mr Yousaf on his appointment as First Minister of Scotland. Does the Secretary of State agree that the effectiveness of devolution arrangements was demonstrated in the use of the Scotland Act 1998—section 35 in particular—to block the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, specifically because it impacted on the effective operation of UK law across the UK?

Mr Jack

Yes. I have heard the new First Minister say that it was anti-devolution to block a Bill that had been passed by the Scottish Parliament, but section 35 exists for that very reason. When a Bill is passed by the Scottish Parliament—if it did not pass it, we could not block it—that has adverse effects on GB-wide legislation, section 35 exists to stop the Bill going for Royal Assent so that those adverse effects can be dealt with.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) (Lab)

It is great to see you back in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker. Welcome back, particularly to Scottish questions.

There has been a seismic victory—an historic victory—this week: the Scotland football team beat Spain at Hampden last night, so we all send our congratulations to them. May I echo the Secretary of State’s congratulations to Humza Yousaf, the new First Minister of Scotland? The Secretary of State rightly challenged Mr Yousaf to engage reverse gear on independence, but I think he may already have crashed that car. The new First Minister of course inherits a divided party and the SNP’s dreadful record on public services, but he does not inherit Nicola Sturgeon’s mandate—at the Holyrood election, the ballot paper said

“Nicola Sturgeon for First Minister”,

not “Humza Yousaf”. Does the Secretary of State agree with me and with Humza Yousaf himself, who rightly called for a UK general election after there was twice a change in Prime Minister last year? Does the Secretary of State agree that a new First Minister with no mandate means that there should now be not only a general election, but a Scottish election?

Mr Jack

There is a precedent for political parties voting in new leaders who then assume office: Henry McLeish replaced Donald Dewar, Jack McConnell replaced Henry McLeish, Gordon Brown replaced Tony Blair, and even Nicola Sturgeon replaced her at-the-time great friend and mentor—her words, not mine—Alex Salmond. It would be hypocritical of me to say otherwise, because last year, of course, I defended the change of Prime Ministers, and it is hypocritical that Humza Yousaf suggested then that we should have an election and there is now deafening silence.

Ian Murray

That answer shows that both the Conservative party and the SNP are democracy deniers. In January—[Interruption.] In January, Madam Deputy Speaker—[Interruption.] They don’t like it up ’em! In January, the UK Government announced that they had signed a memorandum of understanding with BioNTech and Moderna to conduct trials of vaccines that can attack cancer cells. Such innovative treatments could be a lifeline for those with terminal cancers, such as David Williamson from Glasgow, who contacted me and others to plead to be accepted on to those trials. However, David lives in Scotland, and as it stands the trials are due to take place in England only. He has written to both the UK and Scottish Health Secretaries but has failed to receive a response. David does not want to die knowing that there could be a treatment that could help him. Does the Secretary of State agree that potentially life-saving treatments should be available throughout the UK? Will he work to resolve this matter urgently for David and thousands of others?

Mr Jack

This is a very serious issue and my sympathies are with David and his family. I know that he has written to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. I am a great believer in our NHS being reciprocal across the United Kingdom and will organisation a meeting for the hon. Gentleman with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care at the earliest opportunity.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)

I call the SNP spokesperson, Dr Philippa Whitford.

Dr Philippa Whitford (Central Ayrshire) (SNP)

I, too, welcome you to the Chair for Scottish questions, Madam Deputy Speaker, and join Labour’s shadow Secretary of State in celebrating Scotland’s win. It is just a pity that people could not watch it on Scottish terrestrial television.

The devolved Governments have led on many innovative policies, such as the carrier bag charge in Wales and the smoking ban and minimum unit pricing of alcohol in Scotland, with the UK Government following years later, if at all. The attacks on the latter policy at the time show that, had it existed then, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 would inevitably have been used to block minimum unit pricing, which has recently been credited with a 13% drop in alcohol-related deaths in Scotland. Even the EU single market allows policy divergence to improve public health and the environment, so why are there no such derogations in the internal market Act?

Mr Jack

Let me pick up the hon. Lady’s first point, because we do not want the grievance factory to say, as I have seen on social media today, that the English Government blocked people in Scotland watching the game against Spain last night in which we were so victorious—[Interruption.] I said “on social media”. The Scottish Football Association sold the rights to the football match. It was the Scottish FA’s decision.

On the hon. Lady’s second point, there are opportunities for derogations and exemptions within the UK internal market. We did it in the case of plastic cutlery because the same proposal was coming forward in the rest of the UK six months after it was introduced by the Scottish Government. The schemes worked together and a derogation for six months worked. But derogations do not work when there are different schemes in different parts of the United Kingdom, some of which include glass and some of which do not, and when producers have to sign up to different schemes that have a huge cost implication. We do not think that is the right way forward.

Dr Whitford

It is funny how differences in the different nations worked fine before Brexit. One has to wonder why the UK market does not seem able to cope right now. Is the Secretary of State planning to hold back the devolved Governments repeatedly to avoid making his Government look bad? Or is he just going to seek every single chance to attack devolution and enforce Westminster rule?

Mr Jack

I quoted earlier the chief executive of Tesco, the largest retailer in the United Kingdom. In the paper yesterday he made the very good point that there is one drinks industry across the United Kingdom and we should have one solution to the recycling problem.

April 5, 2023
Tom Pursglove – 2023 Statement on Supporting People Nearing the End of their Lives

The statement made by Tom Pursglove, the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work on 29 March 2023.

The Government are committed to providing support to people who are nearing the end of their lives. For people in this position, special rules allow simple and fast access to financial support through the benefits system.

Today, I am pleased to announce the commencement of the Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Act 2022, which will apply from 3 April 2023.

The Act enables more people nearing the end of their lives to get fast-tracked access via the special rules. It applies to three key disability benefits: personal independence payment, disability living allowance and attendance allowance.

This change means that people nearing the end of their lives who meet the eligibility criteria for one of these benefits, can receive vital support in their final year, six months earlier than they can currently. Those eligible under the “special rules”, get their claims fast-tracked, which means they do not have to wait as long to start getting payments. They are not required to take part in a medical assessment and, in most cases, those claiming will qualify for the highest rate of benefit.

The new 12-month special rules criteria align with the end-of-life approach in the NHS where, for those with 12 months or less to live, clinicians are encouraged to think about what help their patient may need, including financial help.

The Government introduced similar changes to universal credit and employment and support allowance on 4 April 2022. The Act ensures a consistent approach across five key health and disability benefits.

These changes to the special rules for end of life are a culmination of many years of work since the then Secretary of State launched an in-depth evaluation of how the benefits system supports people nearing the end of their lives in 2019. I would like to pay tribute to her and my predecessors in my role, the hon. Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Chloe Smith).

I would also like to thank the many people nearing the end of life, groups and charities that have supported the Department for Work and Pensions. Their input has helped improve the support provided by the benefits system in this area.

I am proud to say that when someone is in their last year of life, they can now benefit from improved support from the benefits system. By expanding eligibility, we will provide thousands more people with financial support to allow them to focus on sharing the valuable time they have left with the people who matter most to them.

April 5, 2023