UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Nusrat Ghani

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2024 Speech on Ukraine’s Reconstruction

    Nusrat Ghani – 2024 Speech on Ukraine’s Reconstruction

    The speech made by Nusrat Ghani, the Minister for Europe, in Greece on 11 April 2024.

    Good afternoon – and thank you for inviting me to say a few words.

    Over two years ago, when the first tanks thundered towards Kyiv, Putin would have felt invincible.

    But events since have shown how foolish he was.

    Foolish enough to underestimate Ukraine’s bravery.

    Foolish enough to think his military’s incompetence would go unnoticed.

    And foolish enough to doubt the West’s resolve to stand so firmly behind Ukraine.

    The twisted lies Putin spreads to justify the invasion and mask his failures cannot hide a simple truth.

    He believes he can take territories and re-draw borders, when he wants, where he wants…

    …and he believes he can get away with it every single time.

    Well, not this time.

    Ukraine must win. Why? Because our collective security is at stake.

    A defeat will invite more aggression. A victory will deter it.

    The question is not whether we have the ability to achieve this – Ukraine has shown it can defend itself. The question is whether we have the will to see it through.

    By defending Ukraine, we defend the values in the UN charter we all subscribe to. The values which have allowed us to prosper.

    Respect for sovereignty is not just about maintaining lines on a map. It is about having the freedom to choose how we want to live.

    All countries have that right – and Ukraine is fighting to uphold that right for all of us.

    The UK was privileged to play its part in welcoming Ukrainians forced from their homes. But they have a right to return and we collectively have an obligation to enable them to do so.

    Putin wants them out because that is how he can destroy, displace and devalue Ukrainian identity and culture.

    We cannot hand him what he craves.

    We must also honour the legacy of Navalny and his unwavering commitment to Russian democracy. I applaud Yulia’s courage and resilience.

    Her foundation will continue Navalny’s fight, and that remains the best tribute to his enduring vision.

    So, how can we restore freedom, prosperity and democracy in Ukraine?

    I would like to highlight the three key ways in which the UK is helping to rebuild its economy.

    First, by committing financially. Over the last two years, we have provided nearly 6 billion dollars of non-military support.

    We are boosting its fiscal firepower. Last month, we worked with the World Bank to speed up and increase the size of loans.

    As a result, the UK and Japan are providing one and a half billion dollars to help with immediate pressures.

    We and our G7 partners have also been clear – Russia must pay for the damage it has caused. We will pursue all routes through which Russian assets can be used to support Ukraine.

    Second, by harnessing the power of the private sector. The World Bank judges recovery will require almost half a trillion US dollars.

    Daunting as it sounds, it is achievable if we tap into the capital, creativity and expertise of businesses.

    The Ukraine Recovery Conference in London last year mobilised international partners, including the private sector, raising a staggering 60 billion US dollars of support.

    We of course have further to go – but it was a clear indication of what we can achieve together.

    Last year, I also personally oversaw the creation of a war-risk insurance scheme to protect and encourage UK businesses supporting Ukraine.

    Finally, we are helping by stimulating Ukraine’s trading industry. Before the invasion, it was a leading exporter of food, grains, steel and much more.

    There is no reason why that should not be the case once again.

    So, the UK is undertaking a series of trade missions to strengthen long-term cooperation and galvanise investment into Ukraine.

    Make no mistake. This is the defining struggle of our generation. The make-or-break moment is this year.

    The costs of failing to support Ukraine now will be far greater than the costs of repelling Putin.

    That is why we must devote our hard-worked resources and precious time to this collective endeavour.

    There is so much to do and so little time to do it.

    I’ll just finish on what President Zelensky put so well:

    When asked what will bring the end of the war, we used to say “peace”.

    Now, we say “victory”.

    Thank you.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2024 Speech at the Make UK’s National Manufacturing Conference

    Nusrat Ghani – 2024 Speech at the Make UK’s National Manufacturing Conference

    The speech made by Nusrat Ghani, the Minister for Industry and Economic Security, at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre in London on 27 February 2024.

    Good morning and thank you to Make UK – not just for inviting to me to speak to you today but for your tireless work in both championing and celebrating the best of British manufacturing.

    We’re going to spend a lot of today talking about the innovations of tomorrow, and it’s right that we do so.

    But we can’t reflect on the future without first considering the present.

    Last Saturday marked two years since Vladimir Putin’s illegal, appalling invasion of Ukraine.

    The shockwaves of that invasion continue to reverberate around the world.

    Meanwhile, international shipping in the Red Sea has been undermined by unprovoked Houthi attacks.

    And the global economy continues to reel from the devastating effects of COVID.

    The lesson for us in all of this is the same one which has been hard learnt by the global energy sector in recent years. If the UK is to be safe, secure, and not at the whim of tyrants, key sectors of our economy must be able to stand on their own two feet.

    The days of Western economies outsourcing manufacturing to the cheapest option in far flung corners of the globe are over.

    And there is a growing recognition across the West that we must take steps toward being more self-sufficient, more self-determined.

    And we must do so in an increasingly competitive global environment.

    Every year my department analyses which countries are going to define the future of the world’s economy, not just over the next three years but over the next three decades.

    Naturally, we expect to see countries like China, India, and Brazil growing by leaps and bounds. But we are also likely to see some of the world’s smaller economies like Bangladesh growing into even bigger, global players.

    I know it’s become fashionable in some quarters to question whether the rise of these nations – especially in manufacturing – will precipitate our decline.

    In fact, nothing could be further from the truth….

    Look around this room and see the health of British manufacturing here today.

    What’s encouraging is that despite our varied pasts, everyone here is united in countering the defeatist narrative that the UK doesn’t ‘make anything anymore.’

    Because the exact opposite is true. We have always been and always will be a manufacturing powerhouse.

    The figures speak for themselves. Overall, the UK’s industrial sector has increased year on year over the last half century. We have consistently been one of the largest manufacturers in Europe and globally. And, according to the OECD, since 2010 the UK has had the fastest growing manufacturing sector in the G7.

    On a more personal level, through the businesses I’ve visited, the innovations I’ve witnessed and the entrepreneurs I speak with every day, I see a manufacturing sector which is not just surviving but thriving and driving growth throughout the UK.

    Supporting a thriving manufacturing sector

    But the world is changing faster than we ever realised possible. As everyone in this room is well aware the communications revolution of the last 50 years has precipitated a snowball effect of innovation.

    Whether it’s the rise of 3D printing, the advent of AI or space tourism, what was science fiction even two decades ago is fast becoming science fact.

    The truth is that if you want to stay in the game you’ve got to be ahead of the game.

    That’s why, along with my ministerial colleagues, I am focused on creating the right conditions where future-facing manufacturing businesses can thrive.

    Investing in skills through our flagship apprenticeship programme and boot camps…

    Building the resilience of our supply chains…

    And attracting investment into emerging technologies and green energy.

    The Advanced Manufacturing Plan is at the heart of this work.

    It sets out our ambition to make the UK the best place in the world, to start, grow and invest in manufacturing…

    …An ambition backed by over £4.5bn of investment to continue our successful business programmes to 2030, including in vital sectors like aerospace, aviation, and offshore wind.

    And that sits alongside measures to support the whole sector – generous tax relief and business-boosting reforms like making full expensing for businesses permanent; something I know Make UK and others have long-called for.

    Alongside this work we’ve brought in five new Advanced Manufacturing investment zones each with an envelope of £160 million over ten years.

    So, we’re making progress and I’m pleased Make UK’s recent Executive Survey for 2024 reflects that too – a majority of manufacturers view the UK as a more competitive place compared with just a third in the previous year.

    However, I’m well aware that your report out today suggests a series of additional steps the Government should take. It’s a vital contribution to the debate on how we create a pro-business, innovation nation and we’ll be carefully reviewing its recommendations….

    For my part, I believe we’ll achieve that goal through striving towards three clear goals.

    Boosting innovation through investment….

    Building resilience so your businesses are ready for the future….

    And delivering for British businesses at home and abroad.

    Let me speak to each of these goals.

    Boosting investment and innovation

    First, investment. For every £1 of Government support for our manufacturing sector, we are leveraging £5 of additional private sector investment.

    You can see the tangible impact of that in our automotive sector. The backing of big global players like Nissan, who are set to build two new 100% electric models in their Sunderland plant this year.

    It’s a recipe for success we’ve seen replicated across the country and I’m proud that my department is driving that investment forward.

    We’ve worked with BMW to secure £600 million investment in the UK so more iconic Mini Coopers can roll off production lines in Oxfordshire.

    Meanwhile Ellesmere Port in Cheshire is primed to become our first EV-only factory ensuring that British marques like Jaguar and Land Rover can compete with the best of Tesla, General Motors and BYD.

    We’ve been just as ambitious – and just as proactive – in our aviation sector, supporting one of the biggest deals in the industry’s history with Air India – an order for 250 new Airbus aircraft.

    A similar deal between Airbus and Turkish Airlines will see 140, Rolls-Royce engines assembled and tested in Derby, fitted to the A350.

    These two deals, alone, are worth billions to the UK economy.

    As part of our journey not just to Net Zero, but Jet Zero, we’re ploughing just shy of one billion pounds over the next five years into R&D and our Aerospace Technology Institute Programme.

    At the same time, thanks to Government investment, Boeing are set to create a new aerospace facility at the Sheffield Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre creating lightweight composite materials for planes and 8,000 well-paid jobs in the process.

    The UK built the Harrier, Concorde and the VC10.

    And with the pipeline of investment and talent we’re putting in place today, we will design the next generation of green, clean, aircraft tomorrow…

    When we think about the wealth of home-grown energy we can tap into – solar, wind, nuclear, hydrogen – this Government is taking an ‘all of the above’ approach to secure our energy independence.

    It’s why we have announced our Green Industries Growth Accelerator to decarbonise our energy system whilst ensuring British manufacturers can capitalise on the transition.

    And why, in areas where the UK truly exceeds like offshore wind, we are consulting on major reforms to bring in additional revenue.

    In Dogger Bank off the Yorkshire coast, the UK already boasts the largest offshore wind farm in the world.

    And while China and the US might be hot on our heels, we’re crowding in the investment so that we always stay ahead of the pack.

    Because when it comes to green manufacturing, our aim is to not to keep up, it is to lead.

    That’s why we’ve convened a Battery Strategy Taskforce comprising academic and industry leaders to help the UK press ahead with achieving a globally competitive battery supply chain by 2030.

    It’s why the best and brightest of our nation are coming together to invent new solutions for business.  The SUSTAIN Future Manufacturing Research Hub, in which Swansea and Warwick Universities are key partners, is just one of the research projects working right now to decarbonise and improve the efficiency of industry in the UK.

    And soon, I will be co-chairing the very first Hydrogen Propulsion Manufacturing Taskforce – which includes leading manufacturing businesses like your own…

    Helping us realise the economic and environmental opportunities of hydrogen propulsion technologies in transport.

    Building resilience

    Next, I want to turn to how we’re building resilience for manufacturers.

    We are not naïve about the scale of the challenges manufacturers – really all manufacturing nations throughout the western world – will face over the next half century.

    The UK is and will always be a proud champion of free, fair, global trade.

    But that doesn’t mean dependence.

    It doesn’t mean reliance on countries that do not always have our best interests at heart.

    It’s why the UK recently became the first ever country to publish a Critical Imports and Supply Chains Strategy – working hand-in-glove with our strategies on semiconductors, batteries, and critical minerals.

    This 18-point action plan will enable us to minimise the impacts of supply chain shocks for British business…

    But we’re also focused on helping British manufacturing businesses meet a changing world.

    On that note, I know the last few months have been exceptionally difficult for the people of Port Talbot – for everyone affected by Tata Steel’s modernisation plans.

    We’re making sure there is a proper strategy in place – a transition board – to help people and the local communities throughout this process while investing half a billion pounds for a new, modern electric arc furnace. This is one of the biggest industrial support packages in our nation’s history, that will also act as a catalyst for more opportunities in South Wales, especially when connected with the Celtic Freeport.

    It will also mean we can use scrap materials sourced right here in the UK, so we can reduce our reliance on importing raw materials.

    In short, the plan we’re funding with Tata will help the steelworks finally move from loss to profit and ensure Port Talbot remains a steel-making town for generations to come.

    This is a clear illustration of how Government and industry can work together to make sure UK manufacturing can compete and thrive in the 21st Century.

    And that leads to how we are helping to deliver for manufacturing businesses at home and abroad…

    One example is the way we are pressing ahead with our Innovation Accelerator, which I am co-chairing alongside Brian Holliday from Siemens Digital.

    This will bring together leaders in AI technology with a cross section of manufacturing companies – raising productivity, increasing sustainability, and boosting competitiveness for companies of all shapes and sizes…

    …Because you and I know that our biggest manufacturers are supported by an army of smaller businesses.

    And in this, the Government’s Year of the SME, we’re even more conscious than ever that those companies have the right skills and knowledge to succeed…

    It’s why we’ve pumping up to £16 million into our Made Smarter programme – so SMEs across every English region can get ready for a digital future…

    And I can’t overstate the difference the scheme is making….

    Take JIG UK – a bathroom producer – just one of hundreds of firms that are benefitting.

    As a result of the Made Smarter programme its capacity hasn’t just doubled it has tripled…

    Macalloy, a global manufacturer of tension bars and rod systems is another winner from the programme.  Thanks to Made Smarter it can now produce digital diagnostic tools and has completely transformed their business.

    I would encourage any entrepreneur or manufacturer looking to innovate, streamline and drive efficiency to get in touch with my department and discuss how the Made Smarter programme can help you and your business.

    So, we’re delivering for British manufacturers in the UK, ensuring the right investment and support is in place at the right time.

    But we’re also working hard so that more British-designed, British-made goods can be sold abroad, too.

    Our ‘Made in the UK, Sold to the World Programme’ is helping UK manufacturers double exports and sell their products around the globe with a clear target of hitting a £1 trillion of exports by 2030.

    Six years out, and we’re already within touching distance of that goal.

    We have negotiated free trade agreements with 73 countries from Mexico to Malaysia, lowering tariffs and market access barriers on thousands of UK-made goods.

    Our trade deals with Australia and New Zealand – the first to be negotiated from scratch after Brexit – are already seeing homegrown British businesses breaking into new markets on the other side of the world.

    We want to get even more trade agreements with big international partners over the line, including India – the future third largest economy with over one billion potential consumers of UK products, from Bromley bicycles to Barbour jackets.

    So let me sum up by saying: that my job is to help you do your jobs.

    Creating the best possible conditions for UK manufacturing to not only thrive but to lead the rest of the world.

    At the end of the day though – what makes British manufacturing so successful is all of you. It’s brilliant organisations like Make UK.

    And I have no doubt that together we can work hard to make sure that Britain’s future as a powerhouse of manufacturing is guaranteed now and for many generations to come.

    Thank you.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Speech at Policy Exchange

    Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Speech at Policy Exchange

    The speech made by Nusrat Ghani, the Industry and Economic Security Minister, in London on 11 December 2023.

    The UK has led the world in its support for Ukraine and its condemnation of Putin and his illegal war.

    We were the first country to send our Prime Minister to Kyiv to meet with President Zelenskyy at the start of the war. We were at the forefront of providing military and humanitarian aid to the Ukrainian people.

    When it mattered, the UK stepped up to the plate.

    In turn, this support has been recognised by the Ukrainian people, who dubbed the UK ‘Ukraine’s best friend’.

    However, since the very start, we have also recognised that we cannot rely on military force alone.

    Time and again, history has shown us that when economies fail, so do tyrants.

    That is why, together with our allies, we have imposed the most severe sanctions Russia has ever faced in its history…

    …targeting more than 1,900 individuals and entities and 19 Russian banks with global assets of £940 billion.

    …effectively weaponising the Ruble and providing the financial punch to send Putin and his ambitions reeling.

    Sanctions are an important tool in our diplomatic arsenal that allow us to respond to global threats not just with words but backed up with actions.

    We estimate that without combined sanctions Russia would have over $400 billion more to fund its war machine.
    We’ve used them not only to weaken Putin’s war efforts, but also to showcase our unyielding support for Ukraine, to deter corrupt activity and cyber-attacks and to demonstrate our condemnation of international human rights violations and abuses.

    We also want to make sure that we respond to wider HMG international priorities, such as the threat of climate change- we can’t do that without engaging with countries at events like COP28 – so our trade sanctions work must be consistent, clear and boundaried to make diplomatic relations on other fora as constructive as possible.

    My department, DBT, has played a significant part in this work, developing trade sanctions that have had a £20 billion impact on the Russian economy…including by barring Russian businesses from benefitting from our world -renowned services sector.

    Thanks to these measures, imports to the UK from Russia have fallen by 94% since the start of the conflict. While UK goods exports have plunged by 74% and services exports have fallen by 50%. Make no mistake these measures are working.

    Step by step the sanctions imposed by the UK and its allies are destroying Russia’s ability to maintain, upgrade, and modernise its economy.

    …placing a chokehold on investment and productivity – the building blocks of the war machine – which means while Ukraine’s military equipment is improving, Russia’s is degrading.

    Of course, the UK has used sanctions before – but never on this scale or scope or with this level of urgency.

    As a result, we’ve become ever swifter and more capable at imposing such measures.

    But we know we can’t be complacent. We need to stay ahead of those who dream up tricks to swerve sanctions or create workarounds.

    Having one of the most robust sanctions regimes in the world is not good enough if we cannot have absolute, unwavering confidence that our rules are being enforced and that no one is exploiting loopholes in the system.

    That is why we recently carried out a cross-government review of how we implement and enforce sanctions, which highlighted areas where we can do more.

    For instance, we need an expanded toolkit of enforcement powers for trade sanctions breaches – just as we have for financial sanctions.

    These additional civil enforcement powers will complement HMRC’s existing – and continuing – powers to take forward criminal prosecutions.

    That expanded enforcement toolkit will also be crucial to our efforts – working in lock-step with our international allies – to clamp down on trade via third countries to Russia. These powers will allow us to act where there is a UK national or a UK registered company involved.

    And internationally, we are working closely with US and EU sanctions coordinators to liaise with several third party countries to highlight the risks of circumnavigating trade sanctions and together to support them to enforce sanctions effectively.

    This has included joint diplomatic outreach to countries where we are seeing spikes in trade of sanctioned goods with Russia.

    For example, in recent months, we have sent joint delegations to countries like Kazakhstan, UAE and Uzbekistan, to highlight these risks… I have personally recently been to Kazakhstan and Mongolia and seen for myself the challenges we face.

    But our coordinated efforts are paying off. A number of countries – including Turkey, Kazakhstan and Armenia– have announced concrete measures to reduce the risk of sanctioned goods reaching Russia.

    So, you can see how it is critical that we act.

    Today I am proud to say that this is exactly what we are doing, with the creation of the Office of Trade Sanctions Implementation, or for short called OTSI.

    The Office will build up our trade sanctions capability and make sure our sanctions regimes are as impactful as possible.

    It will also crack down on companies that breach trade sanctions and so help to facilitate warmongers and tyrants to cling to power. Its remit will include the civil enforcement of trade sanctions, as well as providing guidance to business and supporting compliance.

    We expect the Office to be ready to enforce trade sanctions next year once its new legal powers are in force.

    Today’s announcement came from listening to business asking what more they need to know to get it right.

    Most have been exemplary in their response to Russia’s invasion, experiencing the sometimes painful financial consequences of complying with these sanctions to stand up to Putin’s tyranny.

    But we do recognise the scale and pace of sanctions-work has been challenging at times. The new office will do more to clarify our expectations and lend support to businesses, ensuring those who play by the rules won’t lose out to those companies that just don’t.

    That is where OTSI will come into its own.

    But we will also need business expertise, guidance and input to make sure the new unit is as effective and as impactful as possible.

    In terms of its functions and responsibilities, OTSI will lead on the civil enforcement of trade sanctions. It will have a range of enforcement tools available including levying monetary penalties on those that break the rules and sanctions dodgers.

    And while OTSI will sit within the Department for Business and Trade, its work will complement the work of other government departments and offices responsible for the implementation and enforcement of other sanctions regimes.

    This includes the Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation, which remains responsible for financial sanctions.

    The Department for Transport, which remains responsible for transport sanctions. And the Home Office which is responsible for immigration sanctions and for Modern Slavery.

    In addition, overall leadership of sanctions policy will continue to sit with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

    OTSI is key in the Government’s delivery of its Economic Deterrence Initiative, announced by the Prime Minister earlier this year in the Integrated Review Refresh.

    This Initiative is focused on strengthening our tools to deter potential aggressors and stop them in their tracks.

    One of the key objectives of this Initiative is building expertise across government in the design, implementation, and enforcement of sanctions, as they achieve maximum impact.

    The new office will better support the implementation and enforcement of all trade sanctions regimes – not just in terms of Russia but for rogue regimes right across the world.

    In fact, Parliament will soon be considering the Government’s latest trade sanctions package, which includes further export and import bans and financial restrictions for Russia.

    Crucially, this new package will also ban the export of a range of goods including the latest items Ukraine has encountered on the battlefield such as machine parts and chemicals, as well as products that raise revenue to fund Putin’s war machine.

    In essence, once this legislation is passed only low-risk, humanitarian, food, and health exports to Russia will remain unsanctioned.

    And there is more to come.

    The UK remains committed to upholding the rule of law, which protects global security and human dignity in all parts of the world, especially the most vulnerable.

    We are more united than ever in the pursuit of international peace, prosperity and sustainable development, and have strengthened our engagement with international partners beyond the G7

    We’ve seen how well sanctions can work and we’re getting even better at using them.

    That’s why I’ve no doubt that the Office of Trade and Sanctions Implementation will be a game-changer for the UK on the international stage, allowing us to move in lock-step with our allies on economic sanctions as they’re needed.

    Sanctions are crafted to be targeted and focused to have maximum impact – we’ve used them to disrupt all avenues for Putin to pay for his illegal war.

    OTSI will also be a game changer for British businesses at home where my department will help in building stronger international supply chains which are not dependent on malevolent foreign actors.

    On Wednesday I’m hoping to launch my Critical Minerals imports supply chain paper to help businesses too.

    In turn, this will translate into the prosperity and security that will benefit our citizens long into the future.

    I’m really grateful to policy exchange for allowing me the moment today to launch OTSI, and I look forward to working with all of you especially if you’re a business so we can develop this work moving forward. Thank you so much.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Speech on British Steel

    Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Speech on British Steel

    The speech made by Nusrat Ghani, the Minister for Industry and Investment Security, in the House of Commons on 2 February 2023.

    First, let me begin by saying I understand that this must be a very concerning time for British Steel employees, following the discussions that took place between the company and union representatives yesterday. Of course, these are commercial decisions taken privately by the firm, and conversations with the unions are private.

    We all recognise that Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has created challenging global trading conditions for steel, but it is very disappointing that British Steel has chosen to take this step for its employees while negotiations with the Government are ongoing. The Business Secretary and I have always been clear that the success of the UK steel industry is a priority. We have worked intensively with British Steel on support to help safeguard and unlock shareholder investment and will continue to do so. Steel is important for our economy, supporting local jobs and economic growth. We are committed to securing a sustainable and competitive future for the steel sector. I must put on record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Holly Mumby-Croft) for all the insight and advice she provides to me as the Minister.

    We have already taken action to protect the steel industry from unfair trade and reduce the burden of energy costs, including £800 million in relief for electricity costs since 2013. That is on top of a range of other support funds worth £1.5 billion to support efforts to cut emissions and become more energy efficient across the sector. It is firmly in the interests of the sector that we continue our engagement. We want British steel production to continue in the United Kingdom, to protect our steel sovereignty as a nation and build a stable, decarbonised and competitive industry. It is in the interests of employees, their communities and all areas of the UK that benefit from the UK steel supply chain, and I encourage the company to continue discussions with us to reach a solution.

    I can confirm that the Government have put forward a generous package of support, which we believe, combined with shareholder action, would put British Steel on a sustainable and decarbonised footing. My officials are helping British Steel to understand that package in more depth, and I am hopeful that together we will find a solution that protects jobs while setting British Steel up for success. Obviously, decisions that the company takes are its commercial decisions, but I will continue to work with colleagues across Government to ensure that a strong package of support is available, including Jobcentre Plus and the rapid response service, if needed. Members across the House should be in no doubt of the Government’s determination to continue support for the UK steel industry, and I urge British Steel to continue discussions to help us secure its future in the UK.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Statement on EU Retained Law

    Nusrat Ghani – 2023 Statement on EU Retained Law

    The statement made by Nusrat Ghani, the Minister for Industry and Investment Security, in the House of Commons on 18 January 2023.

    It is a pleasure to be here, and I thank all Members who have tabled new amendments and new clauses and who will speak in the debate. I also thank the members of the Public Bill Committee for their work.

    I will address the Government new clauses and amendments first, but I will say more about them in my closing speech when other Members have had a chance to contribute. I will also address some of the concerns that have been raised, and some of the misinformation about the Bill.

    The Government new clauses and amendments are minor and technical. They cover four areas. The first is updating the definition of “assimilated law” and how it should be interpreted, and, in the case law provisions, ensuring that the High Court of Justiciary is covered in all instances. I thank the Scottish Government for their engagement: there has been engagement between our officials and those in the Scottish Government, and with the Advocate General. Our new clauses also clarify the fact that the use of extension power also applies to amendments to retained EU law made between the extension regulations and the sunset, and clarify the application of clause 14 to codification as well as restatement. These are technical drafting measures, and I ask the House to support them.

    Let me now explain why the Bill is crucial for the UK. My explanation will directly cover many of the new clauses and amendments. The Bill will end the special status of retained EU law on the UK statute book by the end of 2023. It constitutes a process. Considerable work has been done with officials across Whitehall and with the devolved authorities; that work has been proportionate, and has been taking place for over 18 months. I cannot stress enough the importance of achieving the 2023 deadline. Retained EU law was never intended to sit on the statute book indefinitely. It is constitutionally undesirable, as some domestic laws, including Acts of Parliament, currently remain subordinate to some retained EU law. The continued existence on our statute book of the principle of supremacy of EU law is just not right, as we are a sovereign nation with a sovereign Parliament.

    Sir Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con)

    We all accept that the status of EU law must change and that it will have to be reassimilated into domestic law in due course. No one argues with that. Will the Minister not reflect that it is constitutionally unacceptable to create what the Law Society—which might know a little more about the law than politicians and civil servants—described as a “devastating impact” on legal certainty and business confidence? To do so by means of Henry VIII powers so wide that all scrutiny is, in effect, removed from this House is not taking backing control but doing the reverse of what the Government seek to do.

    Ms Ghani

    I always respect my hon. Friend’s opinion, but he is fundamentally mistaken. We have undertaken a considerable amount of consultation with our courts and have worked with them consistently. It is absolutely right that we deliver Brexit by ensuring that laws made here are sovereign over EU laws.

    Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con)

    My hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) is fundamentally wrong. The Bill is providing legal certainty. Rather than having a flow of EU law interpreted according to EU principle, from now on we will have a single set of laws within this country. That must be certainty rather than otherwise.

    Ms Ghani

    Having a single set of laws across the UK will provide far more certainty.

    Several hon. Members rose—

    Ms Ghani

    Before I take any more interventions, I want to address the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) about the Henry VIII powers. That is a misrepresentation of what is happening. Each Department will review and then amend, assimilate or revoke EU law. Each Department’s Secretary of State will be responsible for the decisions they take. All the laws are on the dashboard, which will be updated once again, and we will be codifying the retained EU law. In the absence of the application of supremacy, restating a rule in primary legislation could lead to the same policy effect as the rule itself currently has. The Bill just sets out a process to allow each Department to take a decision. Why would we not want to review the EU law that is out there and assess what needs to be assimilated? If we can amend and update it, why would we not do that?

    Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)

    Notwithstanding the charmingly innocent faith in lawyers of my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), the key thing about our decision to leave the European Union is that sovereignty lies in this place and with the people to whom we are accountable. The point about this measure is that it will allow exactly that sovereignty to be exacted in practice with regard to retained EU law.

    Ms Ghani

    Absolutely. When decisions are taken either to amend or to revoke, the usual channels will be followed in Parliament. Committees will be put in place and decisions will be reviewed the Leaders of both Houses. Decisions can be taken openly and transparently. We also have the dashboard, which will be updated and already has thousands of EU laws on it.

    Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)

    The Minister is right that the whole point of Brexit was to take control of our own laws. She is also right that there needs to be a single set of laws across the United Kingdom. But the Bill makes it clear that we will not have a single set of laws across the United Kingdom, because a wide range of laws in Northern Ireland are exempt from the provisions of the Bill. Furthermore, in future when EU law changes and applies in Northern Ireland, the gap between the laws in the rest of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland will get ever wider. Does she accept that unless the protocol is dealt with, there is a real danger that Northern Ireland will be treated differently and be constitutionally separated from the United Kingdom?

    Ms Ghani

    My right hon. Friend raises a very important issue. As it is sensitive, he must allow me a moment to ensure that my response is accurate. The UK Government are committed to ensuring that the necessary legislation is in place to uphold the UK’s international obligations, including the Northern Ireland protocol and the trade and co-operation agreement after the sunset date. The Bill will not alter the rights of EU nations that are protected, or eligible to be protected, by the relevant provisions in the Northern Ireland protocol. The Bill contains provisions that, when exercised appropriately, will ensure the continued implementation of our international obligations, including the Northern Ireland protocol.

    It is our preference to resolve the Northern Ireland protocol issue through talks. The Government are engaging in constructive dialogue with the EU to find solutions to these problems. I must put on record that officials have been working with officials in Northern Ireland for the last 18 months. We know how important and sensitive this issue is.

    Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green) rose—

    Ms Ghani

    I will just make a little progress before I take more interventions.

    I cannot stress enough the importance of achieving the deadline. The retained EU law was never intended to sit on the statute books indefinitely. On 31 January last year the Government announced plans to bring forward the Bill, which is the culmination of the Government’s work to untangle ourselves from decades of EU membership. It will permit the creation of a more agile, innovative and UK-specific regulatory approach, benefiting people and businesses across the UK.

    It is a priority of the Government that the United Kingdom will be the best place to start and grow a business. The Bill contains powers that will allow us to make good on that promise. It will allow outdated and often undemocratic retained EU law to be amended, repealed or replaced more quickly and easily than before. It will remove burdens on business and create a more agile and sustainable legislative framework to boost economic growth.

    Sir James Duddridge (Rochford and Southend East) (Con)

    I am sure that my hon. Friend will remember being on the Back Benches and sitting in statutory instrument Committees in which we had no ability whatsoever to change the legislation going through, because it was driven by the European Union. This is about taking back control by giving democratic authority to this place. Furthermore, on things such as maternity leave, minimum wage, annual leave, product safety and international regulations we are already doing better than the EU minimum standards. This Government will promise to keep those standards and, in many cases, increase them.

    Ms Ghani

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There has been a lot of misinformation about the environment. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has committed to maintain or enhance standards. He is right that we had very little say over positions taken in Brussels, but now, in the Bill, those decisions are taken by the devolved authorities. That will remain devolved and they will have a say, so why would they want to give away that power?

    Ian Blackford (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) (SNP)

    The Minister spoke of taking back control, but the harsh reality is that the Government are taking back control from the Scottish Parliament. Yesterday we heard about the UK Government enacting section 35 to strike out a Bill of the Scottish Parliament. The Scotland Act 2016 contains the Sewel convention, which requires the UK Government to obtain the consent of the Scottish Parliament when they are acting in devolved matters. The Scottish Government are not giving their consent. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Why should the Scottish Government not have the right to veto this Bill, which tramples over devolution and our laws in a way that we do not consent to?

    Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)

    Order. Could I gently say to the Minister that in order to facilitate Hansard and hon. Members seeking to hear, it would be helpful if she could address the microphone rather than the Back Benches?

    Ms Ghani

    My apologies, Mr Deputy Speaker.

    The question is, why would the right hon. Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Ian Blackford) not take the power that the Scottish Government will be given through this Bill when it comes to devolved matters, to look at the EU laws and see whether they want to maintain them or enhance them for their own people? Why would they want to reject the power that they have been offered through this Bill? We remain fully committed to the Sewel convention. It is an essential element of the devolution settlement. The UK Government continue to seek legislative consent for Bills that interact with devolution. The right hon. Member’s argument does not make any sense. My worry is that Scottish Government do not want the powers because then they will have to exercise them. I know it is a little bit of work, but it is worth doing.

    This Bill provides the opportunity to improve the competitiveness of the UK economy while maintaining high standards. It will ensure that the Government can more easily amend, revoke or replace retained EU law, so that the Government can create legislation that better suits the UK. This programme of reform must be done. The people of the UK did not vote for Brexit with the expectation that nearly a decade later, politicians in Westminster would continually rehash old and settled arguments, as those on the Opposition Benches so love to do. We must push on and seize the opportunities that Brexit provides. That will ensure that our economy is dynamic and agile and can support advances in technology and science.

    Geraint Davies (Swansea West) (Lab/Co-op)

    On agility, the Minister will know that the majority of the thousands of rules that need to be changed are in the environmental area. Does she think it is a good idea that civil servants are completely distracted and focused on the changes to these rules when we have one in four people in food poverty, 63,000 people dying a year due to poor air quality, sewage pouring into our seas and crabs dying off the north-east coast? Would it not be better if the civil servants and the Government tackled those problems rather than going down a rabbit hole and inventing worse standards than the EU, such as trying to get to World Health Organisation air quality standards by 2040, which the EU is trying to get to by 2030?

    Ms Ghani

    I think many people coming into the debate today think that this is the start of something, but this process has been in place for more than 18 months, and DEFRA has committed to maintain or enhance standards. The constant misinformation given out over what is happening on the environment is simply incorrect. DEFRA has already taken decisive action to reform areas of retained EU law and it already has flagship legislation on our statute book, including the Environment Act 2021, the Fisheries Act 2020 and the Agriculture Act 2020, all on powers that the SNP wants to give back to Brussels. The Environment Act strengthens our environmental protections while respecting our international obligations. It is simply incorrect to suggest that the Government will be weakening any of those protections. The Environment Act has set new legally binding targets, including to halt and reverse nature’s decline. Those targets, with oversight from the Office for Environmental Protection, will ensure that any reform to retained EU law delivers positive environmental outcomes. DEFRA will also conduct proportionate analysis of the expected impacts, so it is absolutely incorrect to misrepresent this Bill.

    Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)

    The hon. Member for Rochford and Southend East (Sir James Duddridge) talked about statutory instrument Committees. I think all of us have sat on statutory instrument Committees, where we know that it is a question of like it or lump it when it comes to what is being proposed. Under this Bill, Ministers will have powers over key issues that our constituents care about. The Minister talks about the dashboard and admits that it still needs to be updated. As a matter of good democratic practice, will she give us, here and now, today, the exact number of laws covered by this Bill, so Members of this House can at least have some sense of the task that they are voting for? If she cannot tell us how many laws are covered, it is definitely not clear to us how any of us can influence them.

    Ms Ghani

    The hon. Member was very astute in Committee, and we spent many hours together discussing this. The dashboard is public. It has had more than 100,000 views to date. I was on it only last night. It has thousands of laws on it, and it will be updated again this month. There is a process within each Department, which is why a unit has been established to work with each Department across Whitehall. Every EU law that is identified will be put on the dashboard. So it is public, it is accessible, and all the information is out there.

    I must just respond to another point that the hon. Member raised, once again, about scrutiny in this place, because it is being misrepresented—[Interruption.] Unfortunately, it is. The Bill will follow the usual channels for when laws are being either amended or revoked. The Leaders of the two Houses will meet and the business managers will take a decision. The Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in the House of Lords has already said that it is comfortable with the way the Bill will progress and the laws will be scrutinised, and the European Statutory Instruments Committee has said that it is comfortable with the way the laws will be scrutinised and assessed. So there is a process in place, as there was for a no-deal Brexit. The crunch is: if you do not like Brexit and if you did not like the way the Brexit vote that took place, you are not going to like any elements of this Bill.

    Saqib Bhatti (Meriden) (Con)

    Just before that intervention, the Minister was talking about the environment. Is it not the case that Members on this side of the House have delivered the Environment Act, that we are perfectly capable of making our own laws and delivering for the British people and that we do not need guidance from the European Union, unlike those on the Opposition Benches?

    Ms Ghani

    Absolutely. We on this side of the House have done a tremendous amount of work that did not require us to be directed by bureaucrats in Brussels. This gives me a great opportunity to point out all the fantastic work that we have achieved.

    First of all, I must just say again that we will be maintaining and enhancing environmental standards. I want to touch on a list of things that we have achieved, especially on animal welfare, which has been a huge priority for Government Members. We have had the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 and the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022. Since 2010, we have had new regulations on minimum standards for meat and chickens, banned the use of conventional battery cages for laying hens, made CCTV mandatory in slaughterhouses in England, made microchipping mandatory for dogs in 2015, modernised our licensing system for a range of activities such as dog breeding and pet sales, protected service animals via Finn’s law, banned the commercial third-party sale of puppies and kittens via Lucy’s law, passed the Wild Animals in Circuses Act 2019 and led work to implement humane trapping standards. Our Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill will further the rights of animals outside the EU, including the banning of export of live animals for slaughter and fattening. It is remarkable how much we can achieve when we are left to our own devices.

    Caroline Lucas rose—

    Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab) rose—

    Ms Ghani

    I will just make a little bit of progress.

    As I have said, the sunset clause is necessary and is the quickest and most effective way to pursue retained EU law reform. It is only right to set the sunset and the revocation of inherited EU laws as the default position. It ensures that we are proactively choosing to preserve EU laws only when they are in the best interests of the UK. It ensures that outdated and unneeded laws are quickly and easily repealed. It will also give the Government a clear timeline in which to finish the most important tasks. Some retained EU laws are legally inoperable, and removing them from the statute book easily is good democratic governance. Requiring the Government to undergo complex and unnecessary parliamentary processes to remove retained EU law that is no longer necessary or operable, and can more easily be removed, is not good governance.

    Mike Amesbury (Weaver Vale) (Lab)

    Surely parliamentary sovereignty is giving Members of Parliament control, not the Executive or bureaucrats in Whitehall.

    Ms Ghani

    The reality is that Ministers take decisions all the time, and there is a process in place where laws are amended or updated if there is a significant policy change. The same policy process will be in place. If the hon. Member is not comfortable with Conservative Ministers taking those decisions or with the SI process that is already in place, fundamentally he is just not comfortable with the decisions we are taking because we are taking these rules from Europe and placing them here on our UK statute book. That is a different argument altogether.

    Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)

    I want to react to what I think I heard the Minister saying when she suggested that those of us who did not support Brexit in the referendum would not support this Bill. That is not the case. As someone who did not vote for Brexit but who absolutely recognises that democratic choice and respects the referendum, I do support the premise of the Bill. We need to look at the EU law, although there are elements of the Bill we could improve on to give some certainty, and I hope that I will be called to speak later.

    Ms Ghani

    I would not want to misrepresent my right hon. Friend’s position. The point I was making was that Opposition Members who have complained about the Bill have a particular position that has been long held because of the outcome of the vote that took place.

    We believe it is right that the public should know how much legislation there is derived from the EU, and know about the progress the Government are making. For that reason, we have published a public dashboard—perhaps colleagues would like to go on to the site for a moment—containing a list of UK Government retained EU law. The site will also document the Government’s progress on reforming retained EU law and will be updated regularly to reflect plans and actions taken. It will be updated again this month. I was slightly inaccurate earlier: there have in fact been 148,727 visitors to that site. It is not as if people are in the dark. There are many opportunities to be aware of what we are doing.

    Caroline Lucas rose—

    Ms Ghani

    I will give way to the hon. Lady because she has been so patient.

    Caroline Lucas

    I am grateful to the Minister for finally giving way. She is suggesting that those of us who oppose the Bill are opposing it for some kind of ideological reason. I draw her attention to the words of the chair of the Office for Environmental Protection, who herself said:

    “Worryingly, the Bill does not offer any safety net, there is no requirement to maintain existing levels of environmental protection”.

    Not only that, there is actually a requirement not to go on and make the legislation stronger. That is written into the Bill.

    On the issue of certainty, I do not know how the Minister can stand there and pretend that this is about certainty when businesses have no idea which laws will be in or out and when she does not know how many laws are on her dashboard.

    On democracy, when we were in the European Union we at least had Members of the European Parliament who had a say over these things. When the laws come back here, we have no say over them at all; it is all with Ministers. Is that what she means when she says this is supposed to be a good Bill that is full of opportunities from Brexit?

    Ms Ghani

    The hon. Lady has got the meme for her Facebook page. Unfortunately, she wholly misrepresents what the Bill is doing. Environmental standards will be maintained or enhanced. At the moment, the laws that come down from Brussels on the environment and land cover everything from the Arctic to the Mediterranean. This Bill is a great opportunity to maintain, to enhance and to review what more we can do to make things better for our environment across the UK. We already have flagship legislation in place: the Environment Act 2021, the Fisheries Act 2020 and the Agriculture Act 2020. The Office for Environmental Protection has been fully established to enforce those elevated environmental rules and standards. The water framework directive covers our water. Instead of misrepresenting what the Bill does, why not take the opportunity to ensure that we enhance provision for what we are not maintaining?

    Alexander Stafford (Rother Valley) (Con)

    Listening to the Opposition, we might think that the EU is the land of milk and honey when it comes to the environment. This is the same EU that put fossil fuels and gas in last year’s green taxonomy. Getting out of the EU allows us to have our own taxonomies and to make far greener efforts than naming gas as a green technology, which it is not.

    Ms Ghani

    We can make sure that we have a better focus on renewables, and we can take the decisions that work best for our communities. Fundamentally, we are maintaining and enhancing. We must not forget that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been able to introduce substantial law on water, animals and land. I have covered the dashboard, and I assume colleagues will now be pouncing on it.

    Departments have been actively working on their retained EU law reform plans for well over 18 months to ensure that appropriate action is taken before the sunset date. Additional work to lift obsolete laws will inevitably be slow, but that work will continue. We cannot allow the reform of retained EU law to remain merely a possibility. The sunset provision guarantees that retained EU law will not become an ageing relic dragging down the UK. It incentivises the genuine review and reform of retained EU law in a way that works best for the UK. What reforms are desirable will differ from policy area to policy area.

    As my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Dean Russell), the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, said on Second Reading, the environment is one of the Government’s top priorities. We will ensure that environmental law works for the UK and improves our environmental outcomes. As I said, we will be maintaining and enhancing. The Bill does not change the Environment Act, and we remain committed to delivering our legally binding target to halt nature’s decline by 2030.

    Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)

    Many constituents have been in touch with me with their concerns about habitat protection, maternity leave protection and other issues. The National Archives says that 1,300 additional pieces of legislation are not necessarily in scope. Can the Minister give more clarity on how many pieces of legislation this Bill will cover?

    Ms Ghani

    We are working across Departments to cover laws that will either be assimilated, amended or revoked. We are finding that a number of those laws are obsolete, and the fact we are still identifying them is good. We are putting them on the dashboard as soon as we can, and we will update the dashboard again this month. It is right that we conduct this exercise to know where we are and to ensure that we refer to UK law where we assimilate, and that we amend it to improve the situation for our communities and businesses. If the laws are not operable in the UK, we can revoke them.

    The hon. Lady mentioned maternity rights, which is one of the unfortunate misinformation campaigns on this Bill. I struggle with the fact that colleagues are sharing misinformation, as people who may be vulnerable are made more vulnerable by such misinformation. The UK has one of the best workers’ rights records in the world, and our high standards were never dependent on our membership of the EU.

    Indeed, the UK provides far stronger protections for workers than are required by EU law. For example, UK workers are entitled to 5.6 weeks of annual leave compared with the EU requirement of four weeks—we are doing better here. We provide a year of maternity leave, with the option to convert it to shared parental leave. The EU requirement for maternity leave is just 14 weeks—we are doing better here. The right to flexible working for all employees was introduced in the UK in the early 2000s, whereas the EU agreed its rules only recently and offers the right only to parents and carers—we are doing better here. The UK introduced two weeks’ paid paternity leave back in 2003. Who can remember then? The EU legislated for this only recently—once again, we are doing better here. I ask Members please not to hold up Brussels as a bastion of virtue, as that is most definitely not the case.

    Stella Creasy

    Will the Minister give way?

    Ms Ghani

    I will make a little progress.

    Significant reform will be needed in other areas, which is why the powers in the Bill are necessary. The people of the UK expect and deserve positive regulatory reform to boost the economy. Via this Bill, we will deliver reform across more than 300 policy areas. We cannot be beholden to a body of law that grows more obsolete by the day just because some in this House see the EU as the fount of all wisdom.

    Robin Millar (Aberconwy) (Con)

    My hon. Friend is setting out a very powerful case. On the one hand, she is making the case that in Britain we have many laws that are superior and offer greater benefits and protections to residents, and on the other hand, she is making the self-evident point that we should unshackle ourselves from laws that will become increasingly historical, some of which were assimilated into British statute without scrutiny.

    Will the devolved Administrations be able to preserve retained EU law where it relates to devolved areas of competence?

    Ms Ghani

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. If the law is already devolved, the devolved Administrations have the ability to assimilate, amend or revoke, which is why some of the interventions from Opposition Members are slightly absurd. Why would they not want the opportunity to have a review? If the devolved Administrations want to assimilate the law, they can. If they want to amend it, they can. If they wish to revoke it, they have that choice. Why would the devolved Administrations not want to embrace the powers this Bill will give them?

    Hywel Williams (Arfon) (PC)

    The Minister talks about the devolved Administrations hanging on to their powers. Will she ensure that the dashboard on retained EU law is updated to identify which legislation is reserved and which is devolved, as well as how legislation in Wales might be affected?

    Ms Ghani

    Yes. The hon. Gentleman may have missed the earlier part of my speech. Government officials have been working with devolved Administration officials for more than 18 months, and that work will continue. When we discover an EU law, we put it on the dashboard. Of course, there are conversations with officials in the devolved authorities, and it is important that we continue to work closely with them.

    I was going to say more about the UK’s tremendous work on the environment, because I saw some dreadful, inappropriate coverage in the press, including nonsense about marine habitats. I have just had some information from DEFRA about its fantastic work in Montreal on marine. We have done more work on environmental standards and status outside the EU, including in protected areas such Dogger Bank, to enhance protection by 2030. We are also integrating our ocean and coastal mapping.

    Unfortunately, colleagues who are uncomfortable with the Bill have also peddled misinformation about our water bodies and water standards. There is an assumption that the target is being moved, which is absolutely incorrect. Targets are not being moved. It is incorrect to say that the target for the good state of England’s water bodies has been changed—it is still 2027, as outlined in the water framework directive. Hopefully that will cancel out any other misinformation on this stuff being shared on social media sites.

    Reform will be needed in other significant areas, which is why the powers in the Bill are necessary. It has been suggested that the Bill will somehow be a bonfire of workers’ rights. We are proud of the UK’s excellent record on labour standards, and we have one of the best workers’ rights records in the world. Our high standards were never dependent on our membership of the EU. Indeed, the UK provides far stronger protections for workers than are required by EU law. I have already spoken about maternity rights, but we can also look at maternity cover, holiday pay and other rights for employees.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nusrat Ghani on 2016-02-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how many new businesses have been set up in Wealden constituency since May 2010.

    Anna Soubry

    There is no single data source that comprehensively measures all business start-ups within the UK. However, ONS has published statistics showing that there were 2,770 businesses newly registered for VAT or PAYE in the Wealden constituency between 2010 and 2014. Some newly registered businesses will have been trading for a number of years and other active businesses will not be covered because they are operating below the VAT and PAYE registration thresholds.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nusrat Ghani on 2016-05-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Answer of 9 May 2016 to Question 36176, what assessment his Department has made of the reasons for the increase in the count of finished admission episodes with a primary or secondary diagnosis of endometriosis, between 2010-11 and 2014-15.

    Jane Ellison

    The Department has not conducted a formal assessment of the reasons for the increase in hospital admissions with a primary or secondary diagnosis of endometriosis, between 2010-11 and 2014-15. However, it has asked the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to develop a guideline on the diagnosis and management of endometriosis. This will include: use of staging systems to guide treatment decisions; timing of interventions; and pharmacological and surgical treatments. A consultation on the draft guidelines is scheduled to run from 27 February 2017 until the 10 April 2017, with an expected publication date of September 2017.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Nusrat Ghani – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nusrat Ghani on 2015-10-28.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps her Department is taking to promote the safety of students in Ethiopia who are campaigning for democracy and human rights.

    Grant Shapps

    We remain deeply concerned about the deaths that followed the student protests in early May 2014 in Oromiya State in Ethiopia, and have raised our concerns with the authorities at the highest levels. We sought assurances that any members of the security forces who are found to have used excessive force are held to account, and that measures will be put in place to avoid further such incidents.

    The UK Government takes allegations of human rights abuses very seriously. We regularly raise democracy and human rights concerns , including at the highest level of the Ethiopian Government.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nusrat Ghani on 2016-02-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many people in Wealden constituency are registered as (a) blind and (b) partially sighted.

    Alistair Burt

    Information on the numbers of people with sight impairment is collected by the Health and Social Care Information Centre every three years. Data is not collected at constituency level as part of the Registered Blind and Partially Sighted collection and so a response has been provided covering East Sussex, the council with adult social services responsibility which includes the Wealden constituency. According to the Registered Blind and Partially Sighted People report for England for the year ending 31 March 2014, there were 1,915 people registered as blind and 1,990 people registered as partially sighted within the East Sussex local authority area.

  • Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Nusrat Ghani – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Nusrat Ghani on 2016-05-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to Managing migratory flows in Calais: joint ministerial declaration on UK/French co-operation, published on 20 August 2015, what progress has been made on implementing the measures in that declaration to reinforce border security in northern France where the UK operates a juxtaposed border control.

    James Brokenshire

    The UK Government has invested tens of millions of pounds to reinforce border security through infrastructure improvements at the Juxtaposed ports, and continues to work closely with the French authorities at both political and operational levels. The vast majority of the security work identified in the Joint Declaration has been completed including the installation of 52 miles worth of critical security fencing, advanced anti-intrusion measures such as infra-red cameras, thermal detection cameras and floodlighting in key areas.

    In addition to this the UK has funded security guards and since June 2015 doubled Border Force contractor freight searching and dog detection capability at the juxtaposed controls. To help coordinate the law enforcement response from the UK and France a joint command and control centre has been established. The investment in security by the UK, the closer coordination of our law enforcement response and the significant investment in police resources by the French Government, has significantly improved the security situation in Northern France.

    The UK and France regularly review security at the ports to ensure the new measures are maintained and remain effective. Furthermore, at the UK-France summit in Amiens on 3 March, the Home Secretary announced that the UK will contribute £17 million over the next financial year to joint work with France to ease migrant pressures in the Calais region and further strengthen the UK border.