The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2015-12-03.
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, how many journeys he and his Ministers have undertaken in his Department’s ministerial car in the 2015-16 session of Parliament to date.
Stephen Crabb
Following my appointment as Secretary of State for Wales in July 2014, I returned the Wales Office’s Ministerial Car, delivering a saving of around £81,000 to the taxpayer for 2015/16.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2016-07-18.
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he plans to make additional funding available to the Welsh Health Service as a result of the decision to offer increased annual payments to victims of contaminated blood.
Mr David Gauke
Health functions have been devolved to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This means responsibility for the infected blood payment schemes is a matter for those devolved administrations. The proposals for reform, set out in the government’s consultation response document published July 13, are for England only.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2015-12-03.
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, what official visits each of the Ministers in his Department have made since July 2014; and what the purpose of each such visit was.
Stephen Crabb
Details of Ministerial visits are published on the Department’s website.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2016-07-18.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent discussions he has had with the Welsh Government about financial support for victims of contaminated blood.
Nicola Blackwood
The then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Jane Ellison) wrote to Vaughan Gething on 13 July 2016 to inform him of the publication of the Government Response to the Consultation on Reform of Financial and Other Support for those infected and affected by NHS supplied blood, and offered to arrange a call to discuss this further.
Officials from the Department and the Welsh Government have been working together over the past few months on the issue of scheme reform, including a workshop in London in March to consider the themes emerging from the England consultation, and regular phone conferences.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2015-12-03.
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, how many meetings he has held with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 2015-16 session of Parliament to date.
Stephen Crabb
I have regular meetings with my Rt hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer along with all other Cabinet Ministers.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2016-07-21.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to promote LGBT rights in Indonesia.
Alok Sharma
The British Ambassador and Deputy Head of Mission in Jakarta have discussed this issue with a range of civil society organisations and have raised our concerns with Indonesian Ministers, including the Minister for Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection. Embassy officials will continue to meet the LGBT community and human rights activists to understand their concerns and provide support where we are able.
The speech made by Nia Griffith, the Labour MP for Llanelli, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2022.
My hon. Friends have set out very clearly the shocking scandal of the PPE contracts. They have also mentioned people who were working hard on the frontline, putting themselves in danger to help others; and, of course, all those who lost loved ones. I will concentrate on the damage that the VIP lanes have done to loyal, reputable companies—the backbone of British business—who offered to be generous and go the extra mile to help, rather than looking for chances to rip the taxpayer off.
BCB International, a company that operates in my constituency and in Cardiff, is a long-established manufacturer and supplier of life-saving equipment, including medical equipment. Its primary customers in the UK are the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Justice and many police forces, and it exports approximately 40% of its turnover. It makes, for instance, very good fuel for camping gas stoves called FireDragon. It was registered, it was known to the MOD and the MOJ, it had a good reputation, and it was ready to go. In March 2020, it was engaged in the production of its high-quality hand sanitiser, Dr Browne’s, in Llanelli. It employed up to 100 staff, and worked 24/7. The 80% alcohol sanitiser passed all the appropriate tests, and was well liked and used by the NHS in Wales, as well as by a number of police forces and other public bodies.
Owing to the PPE shortages, the UK Government made a commitment early in the pandemic to “back British business”, and their “UK Make” programme, headed by Lord Deighton, was tasked to unleash the potential of UK industry to scale up domestic PPE manufacturing. In May 2020, Lord Deighton said:
“As countries around the world face unprecedented demand for PPE, British industry is stepping forward to make sure vital pieces of equipment reach our workers on the frontline.
My role is to increase our homegrown PPE supplies, both now and in the future, by investing in the potential of UK manufacturing.”
However, I understand that the “UK Make” policy was withdrawn in September 2020.
In May 2020, following the Government initiatives, BCB invested £700,000 in new hand sanitiser production equipment. It also bought in high-quality FFP3 face masks from Europe, set up gown production, and made oxygen bottle bags. It supplied all those, successfully and on time, to the Welsh NHS, to Welsh and English police forces and to the MOD.
From March 2020, the company regularly tried to sell its British PPE products to the Department of Health and Social Care, and it has provided a brief overview of just some of the names that it was in contact with. I do not have time to read them out now, but the company tells me that although it made these contacts and sent many other emails, it was never contacted back. That is an utter disgrace, and today we have seen why that was the case. There was no need for it to be the case. Good, loyal companies that did everything they possibly could and turned their workforces to working for the country were completely ignored.
As has been mentioned, it was not like that in Wales, and companies have spoken very highly of the Welsh procurement procedure. It is no wonder that the Auditor General for Wales has said:
“In contrast the position described by the NAO in England, we saw no evidence of a priority being given to potential suppliers depending on who referred them.”
Those are extremely strong words, from an auditor referring to what was happening in England. The Welsh Government put in place good arrangements overall. That is such a contrast, and this is what is so damaging to all the good businesses in this country who want to play by the rules.
The question asked by Dame Nia Griffith, the Labour MP for Llanelli, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.
The Welsh Labour Government are setting up a publicly owned company to accelerate investment in onshore wind and other renewables, thus reducing emissions, increasing energy security and using profit for the public good. Given that onshore wind is the cheapest form of renewable energy, when will the Prime Minister step up to the mark, match the Welsh Government and bring forward an accelerated investment programme for onshore wind across England?
The Prime Minister
There has been a slightly chequered history of Labour councils and publicly owned energy companies—in Nottingham, from memory—and that is not a model that we want to emulate. However, we are supporting Wales with the transition. We invested in the Holyhead hydrogen hub, which is a potential future opportunity, and we are looking at nuclear sites and, as we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Stephen Crabb), at the huge potential of floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea, which will also all be good for Wales.
The speech made by Nia Griffith, the Labour MP for Llanelli, in the House of Commons on 2 November 2022.
It is very important that we do not confuse the institution of the UK Government with this shambles of a Tory Government. Their performance over the past 12 years, compounded by the disastrous Budget on 23 September and followed by four weeks of inaction in which they were too slow to stop the damage, has left people up and down the country in real difficulties. It has left our allies shocked and our reputation on the international stage trashed. People now face higher mortgage payments, higher interest rates, a 12-year squeeze on public sector pay and benefits, and rampant inflation—all because of this Tory Government’s obsession with tax cuts for the rich.
To that extent, I very much agree with the first part of the motion, but we must separate the failure of this Tory Government from the concept of being in the United Kingdom. I am very proud to be Welsh and to speak Welsh, and I know that Scottish people are rightly proud to be Scottish, but I am also proud to be British. We in Wales and Scotland have so much to gain from being part of the UK. It is not about nostalgia or an outdated view of the United Kingdom; it is about a recognition of the UK’s current position in the world.
Admittedly, this Tory Government have done their best to trash our reputation. Nevertheless, we are an important economy—the sixth largest national economy in the world—and we are in the G7. That gives us influence—an influence that Wales and Scotland would never have on their own, and an influence that can be used for good, as we saw when the banks crashed the economy and caused the financial of crisis of 2008. The Labour Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was instrumental in persuading other world leaders to take the necessary mitigating action, showing real leadership. That same Gordon Brown had secured an agreement from the G7 in 2005 to get the debts of the 18 poorest countries in the world cancelled by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. I could go on, talking about his tackling the AIDS and HIV crisis, and providing education for girls worldwide. That is the sort of influence that we can wield as the United Kingdom.
The same applies to climate change, which is of huge concern to many people in Wales and Scotland. We all recognise that tackling it has to be a joint effort, not just throughout the UK but by nations across the world. As the UK we have much greater influence—notwithstanding the appalling pantomime we have seen from the current Prime Minister, first snubbing COP27, the success of which is vital to the very future of life on earth, and then finally being shamed into grudgingly attending—but in the past, we as the UK have used our influence for good. When Labour was in government we passed the Climate Change Act 2008, a world first, and we showed leadership on the world stage in conferences from Kyoto to Copenhagen.
Labour has delivered on devolution to Wales and Scotland, which has enabled us to do things differently. In Wales, for example, Labour placed a moratorium on fracking. It has allowed and encouraged the roll-out of onshore wind. It provides a wide range of additional support grants to help the poorest, and is now consulting on radical changes in business rates. Scottish Labour has called on the Scottish National party to use its power to do more by topping up the Scottish welfare fund, writing off school meals arrears, and providing extra funds for money advice services.
However, critical to getting the best from devolution is a good relationship between the UK Government and the devolved national Governments. Our Labour vision for that relationship is a vision of respect and co-operation—of a Union of nations which want to work together for the greater good of all. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case with this Tory Government, as we saw most recently when the former Tory Prime Minister failed to pick up the phone to the Welsh or the Scottish First Minister during her term of office. That is precisely the sort of behaviour that we do not want, because of course it breeds resentment and makes us feel angry, and the Tory Government are just feeding the calls for independence.
Similarly, with the passing of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 we saw a Tory Government ride roughshod over the devolved nations, driving forward acceptance of the lowest common denominator in terms of environmental standards. We could have had a much more constructive and consensual dialogue. We must not forget that things could be different. At the time of the recent trade treaties with Australia and New Zealand, the officials in the Department for International Trade were helpful in working with the Welsh Government, but that should not be left to chance. We need a proper concordat, enshrining proper processes and consultation, to accord the devolved nations the respect and influence that they deserve on issues that affect Wales and Scotland respectively.
So yes, we definitely need to improve the working of devolution and the relationship between devolved Governments and the UK Government, but the answer is not independence—not because Scotland could not be independent, but because there are substantial issues which need to be considered but which the SNP tends to gloss over. For instance, as my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) explained so clearly, there is the issue of a new currency being devalued. That would cause major difficulties, with people being paid in the new currency but having to make mortgage payments at the value of the UK pound. There is also the problem of how Scotland would cope with its share of the UK national debt, not to mention, of course, the uncertainty over pensions.
We have all seen the complications that Brexit has thrown up. Given that the majority of Scottish exports go to the rest of the UK, the idea of a hard border, as proposed by the First Minister of Scotland, will be sending shudders through Scotland’s economy. Ultimately, however, it is the opinion of the people in Scotland that matters. As has been mentioned already, 18 of the last 19 opinion polls have shown that a majority are not in favour of independence. They want the Scottish Government to concentrate on helping them with their day-to-day problems, and to stop obsessing about independence.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nia Griffith on 2014-05-01.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what safeguards are deployed to prevent a sensor-fused munition operating in automatic mode from confusing a military target with a civilian target.
Mr Philip Dunne
The targeting process, not the weapon, takes discrimination, proportionality and precautions in attack into account. The decision whether to use lethal force against a legitimate military target is made through a rigorous targeting process, the targeting directive for a specific theatre of operations and rules of engagement which ensure adherence to international humanitarian law.
Since 1999, when the requirement to do so under the Geneva Conventions Additional Protocol I Article 36 came into effect for the UK, all new weapons, means and methods of warfare entering service have been subjected to a review in order to ensure they are capable of being used lawfully in armed conflict. The UK is committed to upholding the Geneva Conventions and encourages others to do the same.