UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Helen Hayes

  • Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2015-10-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 11 September 2015 to Question 8870, whether the new life chances measures will monitor households where an adult is in work; and what steps he plans to take to measure the effects of welfare changes on child poverty for children in working households with low incomes.

    Priti Patel

    The Government is committed to working to eliminate child poverty and improving life chances for children.

    We are clear that the existing low-income measures do not drive the right action to tackle the root causes of child poverty. They simply deal with the symptoms.

    We are now setting out a new way to drive effective action and make a real difference in the lives of disadvantaged children. Our proposals in the Welfare Reform and Work Bill introduce new statutory measures of worklessness and educational attainment. For the first time, we are ensuring through legislation that Government action will be focused on these areas, where the evidence tells us we can make the biggest difference for our children – now and in the future.

    These measures will be reported annually, which means progress will be clearly visible for all to see. My Department will also continue to publish low-income statistics as part of the ‘Households Below Average Income’ publication.

  • Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2015-10-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment the Government has made of the level of sexual violence (a) within Syria and (b) in camps for Syrian refugees.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    We are extremely concerned by the high levels of sexual violence in Syria and within Syrian refugee camps. The UN Commission of Inquiry report of September 2015 highlighted widespread sexual abuse carried out by the Syrian regime, ISIL and some armed opposition groups within Syria. Assad’s forces and militia are responsible for the vast majority of sexual violence, which include threats, rape, degrading body searches and sexual harassment in prisons and branches of the security agencies. ISIL propaganda condones the barbaric treatment of male and female captives, sexual relations with adolescent girls and sexual slavery. Unfortunately, many of those who flee the conflict remain extremely vulnerable to sexual violence. Exploitation of vulnerable individuals within refugee camps was highlighted by the UN Equity for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women report “We keep Silent” issued in April 2014. The UK is providing £1 billion in humanitarian aid, which includes support to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to provide services for survivors of sexual violence and has so far reached over 27,000 women in Syria. We are also supporting case management in Jordan for over 800 survivors and cash assistance to vulnerable refugee women in Lebanon. The FCO has committed £5.2 million to projects preventing sexual violence in Syria. We are supporting projects to train health professionals and human rights defenders in collecting and preserving evidence of human rights abuses including sexual violence.

  • Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of the removal of a tenant’s right to choose whether to have a payment of the housing element of the universal credit paid directly to their landlord on (a) private sector and (b) social sector landlords.

    Priti Patel

    The independent evaluation of the Universal Credit (UC) Direct Payment Demonstration Projects report showed that asking claimants to take responsibility for paying their rent did not lead to big increases in rent arrears. We are drawing on the findings from these Projects as part of our approach to continually improving the service. The reports can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/direct-payment-demonstration-projects-final-reports

    “

  • Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2015-10-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the representations made by Shelter and the Money Advice Trust on the effect on tenant choice of the removal of a tenant’s ability to have payment of the housing element of the universal credit paid directly to their landlord.

    Priti Patel

    The independent evaluation of the Universal Credit (UC) Direct Payment Demonstration Projects report showed that asking claimants to take responsibility for paying their rent did not lead to big increases in rent arrears. We are drawing on the findings from these Projects as part of our approach to continually improving the service. The reports can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/direct-payment-demonstration-projects-final-reports

    “

  • Helen Hayes – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II

    Helen Hayes – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II

    The tribute made by Helen Hayes, the Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, in the House of Commons on 10 September 2022.

    I rise to pay tribute to Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on behalf of my constituents in Dulwich and West Norwood. My sincere condolences go to His Majesty the King, the royal family and all who grieve her loss.

    Her late Majesty made a commitment at the age of 21 that she would dedicate her whole life to the service of the British people, and the fulfilment of that promise over more than seven decades is truly extraordinary. Unlike other hon. and right hon. Members, I did not have the privilege of meeting the late Queen personally, but I know that she maintained, as she did with communities across the country, a very strong relationship with our part of south London, most notably with King’s College Hospital.

    The late Queen visited King’s College Hospital three times during her reign, first as part of her coronation tour in 1953, just five years after the founding of the NHS. She visited again in 1968 to open the Ruskin wing, and once more in 2003 to open the Golden Jubilee wing, which was a much-needed improvement in facilities at King’s.

    The late Queen also visited Brixton as part of her silver jubilee celebrations in 1977. A lovely photograph held by Lambeth archives shows Brixton’s diverse community coming out to welcome her and the Queen smiling and clearly making eye contact with a child in the front row of the crowd.

    Most recently, in 2013, the late Queen visited a small but hugely important charity in Brixton. Ebony Horse Club is a riding centre situated in an area with a high level of deprivation. It is brilliant and enables children from all backgrounds to learn to ride, which is a relatively rare experience in any inner-city setting, and to benefit from being around animals and learning equestrian skills. The late Queen’s love of horses is well documented, and I know it was very special to Ebony Horse Club to have her support for its work in making the experiences that delighted her so much—being around horses, caring for them and riding them—available to everyone, irrespective of income or background. The connection continues today, because the Queen Consort is the patron of Ebony Horse Club and recently hosted not only the staff and riders but a number of horses at a reception at Clarence House.

    Our country has seen huge changes and great challenges during the 70 years of the late Queen’s reign. It is testament to her character, her humanity and her willingness to reflect and adapt that she was able to be a constant throughout such a long period and through so many changes, especially in her relationship with the Commonwealth. Her late Majesty’s lifetime of service will be remembered with gratitude. May she rest in peace.

  • Helen Hayes – 2022 Speech on the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care

    Helen Hayes – 2022 Speech on the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care

    The speech made by Helen Hayes, the Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, in the House of Commons on 23 May 2022.

    I thank the Minister for giving me advance sight of his statement today. Labour welcomes the report of the independent review of children’s social care. I would like to add my thanks to Josh MacAlister and his team for their hard work and commitment. I also want to pay tribute to the social workers, support workers, foster carers, children’s home staff, youth workers and everyone else who strives day in, day out to provide safety, support and stability to children who are in need or whose own families are unable to care for them. Their work is vital, it makes a huge difference, and it often goes unrecognised. At the top of my mind today are the group of care leavers I hosted in Parliament earlier this year. They were articulate, thoughtful and kind. All had been through experiences that no child should have to endure, and they all deserved far better than the current system had been able to deliver.

    I welcome the review’s conclusion that a total reset of children’s social care is needed. That conclusion is a terrible indictment of the extent to which this Government have been failing children for more than a decade. During those 12 years, we have seen the number of children living in poverty rise to 4.3 million. That is a key causal factor underpinning the Government’s failure of children: the unbearable pressure on families increases the risk of abuse and neglect. We have also seen the number of looked-after children increase continually, up by a quarter since 2010; the number of section 47 inquiries, when a local authority has cause to suspect that a child is in need, has gone up by 78% since 2011; half of all children’s services departments have been rated “inadequate” or “requires improvement”; vacancy and turnover rates for children’s social workers are increasing; and outcomes for care-experienced children and young people are worsening. In the meantime, the 10 biggest private providers of children’s homes and private foster care placements made a jaw-dropping £300 million in profits last year.

    We welcome the review’s clear statement that providing care for children should not be based on profit—it should not. The law recognises childhood as lasting until the age of 18, and it is shocking that the Government have continued to allow children to be placed in unregistered children’s homes and other completely unsuitable accommodation. We welcome the review’s conclusion that the use of unregistered placements for 16 and 17-year-olds must stop, and stop now.

    At the heart of the Government’s failure is the erosion of early help and family support, which is demonstrated no more starkly than by the 1,300 Sure Start centres that have closed since 2010. We welcome the review’s focus on restoring early help to families so that many more children can be supported to remain and to thrive with their own family, on supporting kinship carers and on seeking to ensure that every looked-after child can build lifelong links with extended family members.

    Although the Minister reannounced a series of policies today, there is nothing here that will deliver the transformation in children’s social care that the review demands. Successive piecemeal announcements are yet further indication of what the review describes as

    “a lack of national direction about the purpose of children’s social care”.

    The Minister does not seem to grasp the depth of change that the review requires, at scale, across the whole country.

    Will the Minister commit to a firm date for publication of a comprehensive response to the review and a detailed implementation plan? Does he expect that there will be a need for legislation? How does this square with the Queen’s Speech voted on last week, from which children’s social care was completely absent? How will today’s announcement of early help investment in a handful of additional places ensure that early help services are available in every single area of the country, so that every family who need help can be supported?

    What representations is the Minister making to the Treasury in response to the review? Will he commit, as the review demands, to an end to profiteering in children’s social care? How will he ensure that the voices and experiences of children are always at the heart of children’s social care? How will he guarantee that the workforce, who are the backbone of children’s social care, are fully engaged and involved as the reforms are implemented? Finally, how will he ensure that, as the reforms are implemented, the framework of accountability for decisions made by the state about the care of children is strengthened?

    This review sets out the urgent need for the Government to put children first and to stop poverty, mental illness, substance misuse, domestic abuse, sexual abuse and other adverse childhood experiences becoming the defining experience of a child’s whole life, so that every child can thrive. Labour will always put children first. We did so in government, and we will do so again. This review represents an opportunity to deliver the total reset that is needed in children’s social care. It is an opportunity that must not be missed, and we will hold the Government to account every single day on the framework of support and the outcomes for our most vulnerable children.

  • Helen Hayes – 2021 Speech on the Tigray Region of Ethiopia

    Helen Hayes – 2021 Speech on the Tigray Region of Ethiopia

    The speech made by Helen Hayes, the Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, in the House of Commons on 25 March 2021.

    I am very pleased to have this opportunity to raise the very important issue of the conflict in Tigray. It is the first time the House has had an opportunity to debate the conflict, which has, since last November, devastated Tigray, the mountainous region in the north of Ethiopia. I have given the Minister’s office advance sight of the questions I will be asking him at the end of my speech, and there are many in the UK and beyond who will be listening very carefully to what he has to say.

    The conflict started in retaliation to an attack on the northern command by the Tigray People’s Liberation Front. The Ethiopian federal Government cut off all links into the region, closed roads, shut down communications and sent their troops to surround Mekelle. We know that in addition to Ethiopian armed forces, Eritrean forces and Amharan militias are also now present in Tigray. Since November, more than 60,000 Tigrayan people have fled into refugee camps in Sudan—some are reported to have had their exit routes blocked by Ethiopian and Eritrean forces; about 1 million people—some sources put the figure higher—have been internally displaced; and 4.5 million people have become food-insecure. Crops have been destroyed, livestock have been killed and agriculture has been disrupted. Tigray is an area of chronic food insecurity. It is the scene of the devastating 1984-85 famine, so deliberately cutting it off from food supplies and markets, as the Ethiopian Government are alleged to have done, means that people will starve.

    Up to 80% of the region is still inaccessible. Some of Tigray’s, and the world’s, most precious cultural heritage sites have been destroyed and priceless treasures looted. Some 70% of health facilities are reported to have been looted or vandalised by Ethiopian and Eritrean Government forces, including, very recently, the only specialist clinic providing care to rape victims in Mekelle. Schools have been taken out of commission—they are being used for housing troops or displaced people. Two refugee camps, at Hitsats and Shimelba, have been razed to the ground. The whereabouts of 20,000 of the refugees they sheltered is still unknown. An estimated 50,000 civilians have been killed, and there is evidence that children have been targeted, and 10,000 women have been raped. Let that sink in: 10,000 women have been raped. The most recent terrible update from the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported continuing human rights abuses, severe malnutrition among young children and a food security situation described as “catastrophic”. In considering this catalogue of destruction, I want to focus on three points. The first is the nature of the conflict. The second is the use of rape as a weapon of war. The third is the lack of action by the international community.

    First, on the nature of the conflict, the Ethiopian Government originally said that the attack on Tigray was a “law and order operation” to deal with a long-running dispute, but multiple subsequent reports indicate a sustained and brutal assault that has included aerial bombardment and ground shelling of settlements, with the deliberate targeting of civilians. This is not a little local difficulty in Ethiopia’s back yard; it risks a much wider destabilisation and escalation of conflict throughout the horn of Africa. Early information trickling out through the refugee camps in Sudan told, right from the start, of massacres of civilians. At Mai Kadra, where responsibility is hotly contested, witnesses have spoken of both Ethiopian Government and Tigrayan militia involvement. Most notably last November, there was a brutal massacre at Axum, one of the holiest Christian sites in Ethiopia. A total of 750 people are thought to have been killed. The stories circulating last year on social media were confirmed last month by Amnesty International in a report that documents aerial bombardment by Ethiopians, followed by systematic killing by Eritrean soldiers going door to door through the town. They particularly targeted young men and boys, prevented people from burying the dead and then looted the town of everything of value, including food. Some commentators have said that food is being used as a weapon of war.

    In January, over 40 people were massacred at Debre Abbay, 300 people were killed in the attack on the Hitsats refugee camp—300 people—and at a village near Samre 500 buildings were set on fire and 60 people are thought to have been killed. At a village called Bora an estimated 100 people were murdered. Emaciated and starving people displaced by the violence are pouring into overcrowded towns. The Norwegian Refugee Council says that 37,000 people have recently arrived at Sheraro, a town in north-western Tigray, where food, water and medicine are running out fast.

    “The situation in Sheraro is beyond dire”,

    the NRC chief, Jan Egeland, has warned. There are many parts of Tigray, particularly rural areas, where there is no communication and there are grave fears about the fate of local people in terms of violence and access to food, medicine and essential services.

    What is clear from both social media and independent reporting is that civilians have been targeted because of their ethnicity—because they are Tigrayan. Footage has been circulating of men in Ethiopian military uniforms speaking in Amharic and shouting abuse at groups of boys while shooting them and throwing their bodies over a cliff. Along with this has been the vandalising of symbols of Tigrayan culture, most notably Debre Damo monastery and the al-Nejashi mosque, one of the oldest in Africa. As the International Development Committee heard last week, economic and service infrastructure has been damaged, with factories looted and vandalised and banks closed, making it hard for humanitarian agencies to operate. The Committee also heard about the destruction of health facilities, the result of systematic looting and vandalism by Eritrean and Ethiopian forces.

    Secondly, I want to talk about the widespread use of rape and sexual violence. It has been estimated that 10,000 women in Tigray have been raped, and recent reports on Channel 4, the BBC and CNN have all documented the horrific nature of the attacks, including kidnapping, imprisonment, rape and mutilation. On Monday this week, an unprecedented letter signed by 12 leading figures in the international community called for the sexual violence to stop. They said there is only one medical facility in the whole region fully equipped to meet the survivors’ needs.

    What especially stands out are the ferocity of the attacks, which is evident from reports and photographs of injuries to women, including the mutilation of women’s genitals, and the targeting of women because they are Tigrayan. The rapists have talked of “Amharanising” the women and purifying their blood. The use of rape as a weapon of war is always abhorrent and heinous, but for soldiers to claim to be purifying or cleansing women by raping them makes this violence look genocidal. What also stands out is the impunity. There is no indication that either the Ethiopian or Eritrean Governments are taking any steps whatsoever to rein in their troops. Those responsible for the sexual violence inflict it with complete impunity. On Tuesday, the Ethiopian Government admitted there had been sexual assaults on women in Tigray, but sought to justify it as a consequence of the conflict.

    In 2008, the UN Security Council unanimously approved resolution 1820, which

    “Demands the immediate and complete cessation by all parties to armed conflict of all acts of sexual violence against civilians”,

    and says they should

    “immediately take appropriate measures to protect civilians, including women and girls, from all forms of sexual violence, which could include…enforcing appropriate military disciplinary measures and upholding the principle of command responsibility”.

    It goes on to say that

    “rape and other forms of sexual violence can constitute a war crime, a crime against humanity, or a constitutive act with respect to genocide”.

    This is tough and unequivocal language.

    The UK has the privilege of being a permanent member of the UN Security Council and has a responsibility to ensure that this resolution is enforced. It was Lord Hague of Richmond, then the Foreign Secretary, who campaigned alongside Angelina Jolie against the use of sexual violence in war, and he received an award for his efforts from the then US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. Now is the time for the Conservative Government to prove that that was more than a publicity stunt.

    That brings me to my third and final point, which is the lack of response from the international community. The European Union, Germany and the United States have paused their aid to Ethiopia, and the US Administration last week sent the respected Senator Coons of Delaware to Addis Ababa. Ireland has led moves for the EU to apply targeted sanctions. However, the rest of the world has done little more than talk, and the Governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea have turned a deaf ear. What is needed is not more words, but action, so I am asking the Minister for action on the following points. The Ethiopia country programme is the biggest UK bilateral aid programme, as the Minister stressed at the International Development Committee last week. Will Her Majesty’s Government align their policies with the UK’s international partners, the US, the EU and Germany, and pause the parts of their aid programme that are going to the Ethiopian Government?

    Will Her Majesty’s Government support the moves to set up an independent UN investigation into the massacres of civilians in Tigray, including those at Mai Kadra, Axum and Samre, and the targeting of refugee camps, including those at Hitsats and Shimelba? Will they do this urgently before evidence, including of survivors at massacre sites and rape victims from hospitals in Mekelle, is removed or destroyed?

    Will the Government introduce targeted sanctions against those in Ethiopia and Eritrea responsible for the atrocities in Tigray, following the approach taken by the European Union? Will they continue to ensure that the UN Security Council remains actively engaged in ending the war in Tigray and the abuses associated with it? Will they press for the immediate withdrawal of Eritrean troops, and seek to ensure that there is an inclusive national dialogue in the country, as many Tigrayans have been calling for, to secure a lasting peace?

    Will the Government specifically ensure that evidence of the widespread use of rape and sexual violence in the Tigray conflict is collated and that the perpetrators are brought to justice in line with UN Security Council resolution 1820? It is wholly unacceptable that soldiers from the Ethiopian and Eritrean armies should be able to rape women with impunity. Equally, it is unacceptable that their commanders-in-chief should permit their forces to use rape as a weapon of war or fail to bring to justice those under their command who commit such crimes.

    Will the Government take steps to support publicly the US Administration’s initiatives to ensure that immediate and full access is provided to humanitarian agencies in Tigray, and that unfettered access will be provided for local and international journalists without repercussions for their translators and fixers?

    The Foreign Secretary has spoken of his experience of taking war criminals to the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Will the Minister therefore press him to take initial steps, through the UN Security Council, to bring prosecutions against those whom the evidence points to being responsible for war crimes in Tigray, including the use of rape?

    The effects of this war will continue long after the guns have fallen silent. There will be empty spaces where civilian populations were murdered, and there will be a cohort of children growing up who are the result of the rape of their mothers. This further illustrates why it is absolutely the wrong time for the UK Government to be reneging on their promise to maintain UK aid spending at 0.7% of gross national income. I hope the Minister will reflect further on that disastrous decision.

    Even now, the UK Government can help avert yet more destruction in Tigray and provide justice for the survivors of the massacres and for the women who have been raped. It will, however, take much more than words; it will take action, and that is what I, and many others, hope the Minister will commit to tonight.

  • Helen Hayes – 2020 Speech on Free School Meals

    Helen Hayes – 2020 Speech on Free School Meals

    Below is the text of the speech made by Helen Hayes, the Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, in the House of Commons on 16 June 2020.

    I pay tribute to Marcus Rashford this afternoon. It is not easy to speak about difficult personal experiences, but by doing so in such a powerful way, he helped to force the Government to act to stop 1.3 million children in England who are eligible for free school meals going hungry over the summer holidays. I also pay tribute to my local councils—Lambeth and Southwark councils—and to the many community organisations that have been working so hard since March to address food insecurity during the pandemic. They show the commitment, care and compassion in our local communities of which I could not be more proud.

    While the Government’s U-turn is welcome, we should not be having this debate today, because coronavirus or not, no child should ever go hungry in the UK. Parents do not want to have to rely on a voucher scheme. They want the dignity and freedom to buy healthy, fresh food to nourish their children. Shamefully, childhood hunger and food insecurity are a huge problem in the UK, exacerbated by coronavirus, but a reality for many families, even without the pandemic. It is hard to understand the mindset of a Prime Minister who does not appear to see this as a top priority and who has to be pushed reluctantly into minimal action.

    The voucher scheme is welcome and essential, but it is not a solution to food poverty. It is not reaching the thousands of families who fall just outside the income threshold for free school meals, or those who will not claim because of the stigma. We know that many of these families are also on low incomes, with precarious work, facing high housing costs and forced to rely on a social security system that prefers punishment over support.

    The Government have a choice: they can keep lurching forward with disorganisation and wrong-headedness, forced to do the right thing only by intense pressure from our communities; or they can start to engage and plan now for a coronavirus recovery that builds back better, addressing structural inequality, low pay, insecure work, the high cost and insecurity of private renting and the ability of our councils to deliver the public services that we all rely on, and they could make sure that no child in the UK ever has to go to bed hungry again.

  • Helen Hayes – 2020 Speech on the Parliamentary Constituencies Bill

    Helen Hayes – 2020 Speech on the Parliamentary Constituencies Bill

    Below is the text of the speech made by Helen Hayes, the Labour MP for Dulwich and West Norwood, in the House of Commons on 2 June 2020.

    I would like to thank all the hon. Members who have contributed to this important debate this afternoon. My particular thanks go to my hon. Friends the Members for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock), for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins), for Jarrow (Kate Osborne), for Bradford South (Judith Cummins), for Luton South (Rachel Hopkins), for City of Chester (Christian Matheson), for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), for Liverpool, Riverside (Kim Johnson) and for Newport West (Ruth Jones) for their speeches, which demonstrated their depth of commitment both to democratic representation and to the communities they serve, and raised important issues about the detail of this Bill.

    Several Members, including my hon. Friends the Members for City of Chester and for Pontypridd, the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson) and the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Craig Williams), raised important points about the impact of this legislation on representation in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Strong devolved representation within the nations is critical to the integrity of our United Kingdom. A Bill that reduces the number of parliamentary constituencies in the devolved nations while increasing the number of English seats risks putting further strain on the integrity of the Union. I hope that the Leader of the House will address that point directly when he responds to the debate.

    Members from all parties agree that the periodic review of constituency boundaries is a vital part of our representative democracy, and that this review is long overdue. It is our constituencies that give shape and meaning to our democratic process, and they ensure that the concerns of each part of our diverse United Kingdom are given voice and representation. For that reason, it is crucial that long-held community ties form the basis of constituency boundaries, bringing together communities that share common interests and needs. That point was made well by a number of hon. Members who spoke of the risk of villages being split or severed from the towns that they rely on. These things matter to our communities. It is therefore extremely disappointing that the Government have again refused to compromise on the issue of the 5% electoral tolerance. What response can the Leader of the House provide to the apolitical academic experts who have highlighted the restrictive and damaging impact that the 5% quota will have on constituency boundaries? Just a slight widening of the electoral quota to 7.5%, as supported by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire, will vastly improve the geographic and community coherence of new boundaries and as a result ensure better representation for communities.

    When the Government introduced the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill in 2010, a pre-legislative inquiry heard evidence from several witnesses that the proposed number of 600 constituencies chosen by the Government was not based on clear evidence. The Hansard Society told the Committee that the number had been

    “plucked from thin air—600 simply being a neat number.”​

    The Government have now made a U-turn on that arbitrary number but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Fleetwood (Cat Smith) mentioned, the 2013 review based on 600 constituencies cost the taxpayer in the region of £700 million, and the 2018 review is likely to have a cost of upwards of £8 million. Does the Leader of the House accept that the Government’s political indecision has been a waste of taxpayers’ money? Will he clarify for the record how much the 2018 boundary review cost?

    Many Members have raised the issue of the alarming removal of parliamentary oversight from the process. Parliament has an important role to play as an emergency backstop to prevent power grabs by the Executive, but the Tories are attempting to remove that backstop, thereby threatening serious unforeseen consequences for the future of our democratic process. Such a move is of deep concern for the integrity of our parliamentary democracy. In response to concerns, the Government assert that removing Parliament from the process will ensure that the boundary commissions’ reports will be implemented without interference from either Government or Parliament, but that is not strictly true. The Government make the legislation that instructs the boundary review process, and Ministers have already taken political advantage of the process by creating a loophole in the Bill. Without parliamentary oversight, the handbrake that previously prevented the Tories from removing 50 MPs on an entirely arbitrary basis no longer exists. If passed, the new legislation will allow the Tories to force through reductions to the number of MPs without any backstop in place to prevent it.

    We are talking about a Government found by the highest court in this land to have unlawfully shut down Parliament, suspending democratic accountability and attempting to gag democratic opposition. This is not hyperbole or idle speculation; it happened just last year. In such a context, there can be no guarantee that Ministers will not take advantage of the silencing of Parliament in favour of strengthening their own Executive power. Will the Leader of the House take this opportunity to confirm that the Government will not simply use the loophole to force through a reduction in the number of constituencies, or any other changes that are not included in the Bill, further down the line?

    My final point is about the electoral registration dataset on which this review will be based. We are currently facing exceptional circumstances. I welcome the Minister’s acknowledgement that the 2020 electoral register will be heavily affected by the current coronavirus crisis, but this is still the enumeration date set out on the face of the Bill. We cannot expect local councils to do the proactive outreach work that is needed to maintain an up-to-date and fully accurate register while providing an emergency response to a global pandemic. The costs of fighting coronavirus have taken an immense financial toll on councils, and they now face a £10 billion funding gap, which the Government are unwilling to fill. Can the Leader of the House confirm that the Government will accept an amendment to the enumeration date to December 2019? This pragmatic change—in the context of a review for which we have waited 20 years, taking place in unprecedented circumstances—will avoid the new constituency boundaries being based on an incomplete and potentially unrepresentative register.​

    The Labour party supports the democratic principle of the boundary review, but the Government must consider the implications of the restrictive 5% tolerance along with the 1 December 2020 enumeration date. We remain deeply concerned about the removal of parliamentary oversight from a process that has always had this scrutiny. I encourage Members from across the House to support the reasoned amendment and to reject the continued centralisation of power in the hands of the Executive at the expense of Parliament.