UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Harriet Harman

  • Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Harriet Harman on 2014-05-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many and what proportion of pupils aged (a) seven, (b) 11, (c) 16 and (d) 18 or 19 years have received the minimum level of cultural education proposed in Appendix A of Cultural Education: a summary of programmes and opportunities, published in July 2013; and if he will make a statement.

    Elizabeth Truss

    The Department for Education does not collect data on the number or proportion of schools in England providing the minimum level of cultural education proposed in Appendix A of Cultural Education: a summary of programmes and opportunities. Nor does the Department collect data on what proportion of pupils, of any age, have received the minimum level of cultural education it proposes.

    The levels of cultural education the Appendix proposes are not mandatory, but are included as a point of reference for schools.

  • Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Harriet Harman on 2014-05-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions he has had with UN Women about the abduction of schoolgirls from Chibok in north-eastern Nigeria on 14 April 2014; and if he will make a statement.

    Mark Simmonds

    Since the abduction of the Nigerian school girls on 14 April, we have focused our efforts on working with the Nigerian Government to locate and secure the release of the girls. We have made no representations to UN Women about the case. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague) made a statement condemning the schoolgirls abduction on 16 April.

  • Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Harriet Harman on 2014-05-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations he has made to (a) the UN and (b) any UN agency on the abduction of schoolgirls from Chibok in north-eastern Nigeria on 14 April 2014.

    Mark Simmonds

    Since the abduction of the Nigerian school girls on 14 April, we have focused our efforts on working with the Nigerian government to locate and secure the release of the girls. We have discussed the issue with officials from counterpart members of the UN Security Council in New York. On 7 May, I spoke with UN Special Representatives (SR), Zainab Bangura (UN SR for Sexual Violence) and Leila Zeroughi (UN SR for Children and Armed Conflict), to discuss what more the UN can do to help.

  • Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Harriet Harman – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Harriet Harman on 2014-04-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, how many schoolgirls were abducted in Chibok in north-eastern Nigeria on 14 April 2014; and what reports he has received on their current location.

    Mark Simmonds

    Approximately 230 schoolgirls were taken. A small number appear to have escaped or been released. There is no confirmation of the current location or condition of those still being held. Most reports suggest the girls were initially taken to the Sambisa forest, where insurgents are believed to have a number of camps. The girls may have now been split into several smaller groups.

  • Harriet Harman – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II

    Harriet Harman – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II

    The tribute made by Harriet Harman, the Mother of the House of Commons, in the House on 9 September 2022.

    Thank you, Mr Speaker. What an excellent speech from the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson), which I am sure will have resonated in every Member of this House and, indeed, everyone in this country. It was a brilliant speech.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to pay my tribute to the Queen, on my own behalf but also on behalf of my constituents, particularly those who, coming from Commonwealth countries in Africa and the Caribbean, held the Queen in such high regard.

    We are a constitutional monarchy, and for we MPs, the Queen was ever present in the interwoven relationship between the monarch and her Parliament. She underpinned our democratic system for over 70 years—underpinning it but never intervening in it. She was always salient but never meddled. She avoided controversy not by staying in the background—far from it; she performed her role to the utmost—but by respecting the boundaries. She carried out her duties and gave us her full commitment for us to carry out ours. When many denigrated, she always respected and supported Parliament. We should be very grateful for that.

    Between her Ministers—not just Prime Ministers—there was regular contact. After Labour won the election in 1997, I went up to the Palace, where she appointed me, like the other new Secretaries of State, to the Privy Council and bestowed on me the seals of office. They are actual seals, which are given to you and you take back to your Department to be locked in a safe. When, just a year later, I was sacked and the seals were taken out of the safe and back to Buckingham Palace, my diary was empty and my phone stopped ringing, my office was astonished to get a call from the Palace. No one else wanted to have anything to do with me, but the Queen wanted to see me. I was invited to take tea with the Queen, for her to thank me for my service as Secretary of State.

    My point is that the relationship between our Queen and Parliament, and our Queen and Government, was never just on paper, but was always active and always encouraging. She radiated British values of duty, patriotism, internationalism, charity and service. But while she embodied British values, she never intervened in politics, and that is constitutional alchemy—nothing less.

    It is evident that everyone, even those who do not agree with the hereditary principle of the monarchy, cannot but marvel at her personal qualities; and I want to marvel at how she could do all this flawlessly, not just over so many decades, but as a woman starting her reign in what was emphatically then a man’s world. We have to remember what attitudes were at the time. The order of the day was that men were in charge and women were subservient. The man was head of the household, and the role of a woman was to get married, have his children and support him. In the 1950s, when she was crowned, I was a child, and I remember my mother warning me that people thought men knew more than women; that men’s views were valuable, while women’s were to be disregarded.

    It was in that atmosphere that she stepped up, as a 25-year-old married woman with two children, to take her place at the head of this nation and play a huge role on the world stage. What determination and courage that must have taken. The Prime Ministers she dealt with were mostly men, and mostly twice her age. Things were very different then; huge change has taken place during her reign. Things were very different when, six years ago, she threw open Buckingham Palace for us to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the BBC’s “Woman’s Hour”, and to celebrate how much women had achieved.

    As Sir Tony Blair said, she was the matriarch of this nation: a matriarch for us on the world stage, and a matriarch too at home, in her own family. As well as being our monarch, she was the mother of four children and had many grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and it is to her family that I extend my deepest sympathies for their loss and condolences for their grief, which we all share.

  • Harriet Harman – 2022 Comments on Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak Being Fined for Breaking Rules

    Harriet Harman – 2022 Comments on Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak Being Fined for Breaking Rules

    The comments made by Harriet Harman, the Labour MP for Camberwell and Peckham, on Twitter on 12 April 2022.

    If you get covid regulations Fixed Penalty Notice you can either admit guilt or go to court to challenge it. If Prime Minister and Chancellor admit guilt, accepting that police right that they breached regulations, then they are also admitting that they misled the House of Commons. Or are they going to challenge?

  • Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on the Personal Conduct of Owen Paterson

    Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on the Personal Conduct of Owen Paterson

    The speech made by Harriet Harman, the Labour MP for Camberwell and Peckham, in the House of Commons on 3 November 2021.

    I am regretful at rising to speak in this debate. Although we have political adversaries in the House, we are also all colleagues who work together in the same place. I have the utmost sympathy for the family tragedy that hit the right hon. Member for North Shropshire (Mr Paterson) and the greatest admiration for how he then took up the campaign for the prevention of suicide to help others. In the more than 20 years that we have been in the House together, he has shown me nothing but kindness and courtesy.

    It is very much because we as MPs know and understand each other that the House recognised that we needed a complaints system that involved a strong measure of independence. We all recognise that the public want, and are entitled to, the highest standards from their elected representatives, and we are proud to claim that that is the case. We all recognise that the people who elect us want us to act in their interest and in the public interest, and that they want no conflict of interest to blur the issue of our private financial interest with our role as MPs.

    Trust in our democracy is all important, but it is fragile. The reputation of the House is easily damaged and, when damaged, hard to restore, as we discovered not only in the lobbying scandal, but in the expenses scandal. How we deal with this issue will reflect on the House as a whole and on each of us individually. I hope that Members on both sides are clear that this is House business, not Government business, and therefore the vote should not be whipped, much though the Whips will try.

    We made these rules on lobbying; we need to enforce them. No one foisted the process on us; we initiated it and decided it. Where there are criticisms about the rules that we decided on, changes can be proposed, but as the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) said, they must have an all-party basis to go forward with integrity. That is the way we should do things.

    What we must not do is make the rules and then decide to set them aside when we have misgivings about the outcome. I will oppose the amendment and support the motion, and I urge right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House to do the same.

  • Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on the Murder of David Amess

    Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on the Murder of David Amess

    The speech made by Harriet Harman, the Labour MP for Camberwell and Peckham, in the House of Commons on 18 October 2021.

    Beyond the horror that we all feel, Sir David’s family are first and foremost in my thoughts. I want to add my heartfelt sympathy to his wife and children. Their statement, released in their unimaginable shock and grief, shows such extraordinary dignity.

    Sir David was one of the most dedicated but also the most affable of MPs. He looked beyond party differences to work with so many of us on a multitude of issues of common concern. That is why there are tears on all sides of the House this afternoon. To give just one example, most recently he took the lead on a cause that I then took up: the injustice done to young, unmarried mothers whose babies were taken from them in the 1960s and 1970s. We all have examples of when he worked with us. My tribute to him will be to redouble my efforts on that cause and to remember and work in the spirit that he exemplified: commitment to constituency, commitment to Parliament and a belief that he could and did make a difference. Sir David Amess, rest in peace.

  • Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on Afghanistan

    Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on Afghanistan

    The speech made by Harriet Harman, the Labour MP for Camberwell and Peckham, in the House of Commons on 18 August 2021.

    It is an honour to follow the Father of the House.

    I strongly agree with what was said by the Leader of the Opposition and by the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), who speaks with the experience of having served as Prime Minister. I particularly agree with what she said about the threat of terrorism and the need fully to reinstate our aid budget, the issues for NATO and the proud legacy of our troops.

    We have all looked on in horror as the events in Afghanistan have unfolded. I join everyone who is urging the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary to do everything they can to help UK nationals, including my constituents, who are stranded and in hiding in Kabul, desperately needing to get back home to the UK. We urgently need to evacuate those who worked with us, who thereby feel that they are vulnerable and to whom we have a moral obligation. The Government are setting up a refugee resettlement programme. I urge them to make a realistic and generous assessment of the scale of the need and to work with all local authorities that want to play their part in giving a warm welcome to those who are fleeing. The Government also need to work, of course, with NATO countries and more widely on an international resettlement programme.

    We need to think about those who cannot or do not want to leave, particularly women and girls. When the Taliban were last in control, there were literally no girls in school. Now—at least, up until the Taliban took over again—40% of schoolchildren are girls; over the last 20 years, there has been a whole generation of girls who have been educated, and a whole cohort of young women who have been able to work and want to continue to do so.

    When the Taliban were last in control, there were no women in public life—no women to speak up for other women. Women were silenced. Now there are 69 women Afghan MPs. Indeed, three years ago, one of them—Elay Ershad—came to this Chamber to speak from the Front Bench while participating in our Women MPs of the World conference, and was welcomed by the former Prime Minister to No. 10 Downing Street. The President has fled but Elay is staying in Kabul with her daughters, in solidarity, she says, with her people. What courage. The Afghan army has retreated, but so many Afghan women are standing their ground. All those women politicians and activists are determined not to let the progress of the last two decades be crushed. They now face great jeopardy. I know that the whole House, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary will express publicly our solidarity with and admiration for Afghan women MPs, who, as parliamentary pioneers—having stepped forward into public life to make a reality of democracy for that half of the population of Afghanistan who are women and girls—are now, in the face of such an uncertain future, determined to protect and defend those rights.

    As to what we can do, I would say: do not just listen to the male leaders about what we need to do for women. I say to the Foreign Secretary, do not just speak to the men; pick up the phone to those women Afghan MPs, ask them what we can do to support women and girls in Afghanistan, and then do it.

  • Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on HRH The Duke of Edinburgh

    Harriet Harman – 2021 Speech on HRH The Duke of Edinburgh

    The speech made by Harriet Harman, the Mother of the House, in the House of Commons on 12 April 2021.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to add my tribute to the powerful speeches that have already been made to celebrate the life and role of the Duke of Edinburgh. For more than 70 years, he was at the heart of the royal family, that most historic and traditional of British institutions. Yet, as has been said, in many ways he was ahead of his time.

    He was ahead of his time on the environment. This year the UK will host the 26th United Nations climate change conference, amidst the recognition here and globally of its importance. Yet more than five decades ago, he was urging us, with clarity and foresight, to understand how all living creatures on this planet are interdependent. These views were so much ahead of their time that they were met by some with derision.

    He was ahead of his time on young people, with the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme, recognising the interconnection of physical and mental wellbeing as a route for young people to develop to their full potential. One of the many success stories of the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award is the work that goes on at Westminster House youth club in my constituency of Camberwell and Peckham. It gets more black and minority ethnic young people through the award than almost anywhere else. Many of those young people have had a difficult start in life or have not thrived at school, yet through the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award they find a route to self-confidence and success.

    The Duke of Edinburgh was ahead of his time as a husband. One of the remarkable things about Prince Philip is that he chose, in his marriage, to put himself second and make his central role in life that of supporting his wife in her role as the Queen. He sought never to eclipse her, only to support her. Way back half way through the last century, that was profoundly counter-cultural. The expectation was that to be a man was to be head of the family, and particularly in the public domain it was the man who would play the leading role, and the wife who would support him. If that—sadly—still remains largely true today, how much more of an iron rule it was 70 years ago. His decision to give up what would have been a glittering career in the Navy, and to make it his duty to support his wife in her role, took him into uncharted territory and left him exposed. For if he was not the head of the family, what did that make him? There was no reassuring recognition that he was no less of a man for what he did in putting the Queen first, and himself second. It takes a remarkable man to be a leader, but an even more remarkable man to support a woman leader, and that is what Prince Philip did.

    When we hear the Queen speak, we know that she always weighs her words carefully. What she said at their golden wedding anniversary in 1997 was that Prince Philip had,

    “quite simply, been my strength and stay all these years.”

    What a loss it is for her to lose that husband, that partner, her liegeman of life and limb. We rightly pay tribute to Prince Philip’s work on the environment, young people, our armed forces, and much else besides. He did his work, but, above all, he enabled the Queen to do hers. For that he deserves our recognition and gratitude. He served this country by serving his Queen.