UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Ruth Cadbury

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2024 Speech on the Economy, Welfare and Public Services

    Ruth Cadbury – 2024 Speech on the Economy, Welfare and Public Services

    The speech made by Ruth Cadbury, the Labour MP for Brentford and Isleworth, in the House of Commons on 22 July 2024.

    It is an honour to be re-elected for the fourth time to the redrawn seat of Brentford and Isleworth, and to follow such impressive maiden speeches, particularly that of my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake), in whose constituency we all work.

    After nine years sitting in Opposition it is a pleasure to be on the Government side of the Chamber and to support this Government’s legislative programme, which brings hope, opportunity and change for my constituents and for the country at last. I will focus my response to the King’s Speech on the Government’s ambitious proposals around transport policy—not only because it is an area I have long been involved with, having served on the Transport Committee for five years and chaired five all-party parliamentary groups on transport, but because transport was brought up regularly on the doorsteps in this last election.

    The theme of today’s debate is economy, welfare and public services. Effective transport policies are essential to the change we need to see in all three areas, as well as in addressing our climate crisis, so I am pleased to see the bold and ambitious plans set out by my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) and her team to do just that. For access to work, education and health services, for supplying our manufacturing and retail sectors and for supporting our wellbeing and family life, decent transport choices are essential, and nowhere are they more needed than in the new communities that will be built, if the traffic on the roads to and around them is not to grind to a halt. Whether in city, town or countryside, we need the full range of transport options—ones that are affordable, accessible, efficient and environmentally sound.

    On buses, I am delighted that, through the better buses Bill, the Government will end the ideological and control-freakery policy of banning local authorities from running their own municipal bus companies. Such companies were killed off by the Thatcher Government in a bout of ideological rage, with only London retaining a regulated bus service. The rest of England should have what we have in London: regular day, evening and weekend services, simple fare structures, and high standards of safety, accessibility and passenger information. Those are being developed by the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, and I look forward to seeing other local authorities—of all parties, I am sure—following his example.

    To be an alternative to driving, and for us to cut road congestion and pollution, rail travel must be reliable. I am therefore delighted to see Bills to create Great British Railways and to bring train operations into public ownership. That is essential for a simplified and unified rail system that focuses on improving passenger services while getting value for the taxpayer. Our constituents, and many Members of this House, have had terrible experiences of cancelled trains, or of sitting on the floor for hours despite booking a seat. We will now see a Government and a Department that do not use transport as a cudgel in our culture wars, or as a crude electoral hammer to override local authorities that want to introduce sensible measures to encourage cycling and walking.

    Transport is at the heart of the challenge of national renewal that we have set ourselves: kickstarting economic growth, boosting jobs and living standards, and building sufficient homes in sustainable communities. Of course there are challenges ahead—not least in further growing capacity in our overloaded rail network. I welcome the plan to improve east-west connectivity across the north of England, but funding further increases in rail capacity will unfortunately be financially unsustainable until we see the economic growth that the Chancellor is working on. Aviation expansion is acceptable only if it passes the four tests that we set ourselves in opposition: cutting carbon dioxide emissions, overcoming local environmental impacts, providing regional benefits across the UK, and deliverability. I know that the new Secretary of State and ministerial team will work across our travel and transport sectors to improve transport connections to the benefit of our country as a whole.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2023 Speech on the Independent Review of Net Zero

    Ruth Cadbury – 2023 Speech on the Independent Review of Net Zero

    The speech made by Ruth Cadbury, the Labour MP for Brentford and Isleworth, in the House of Commons on 9 February 2023.

    I thank the right hon. Member for Kingswood (Chris Skidmore) for his work on the report and for his speech, which will have given many people across the House and across the country a lot of hope—something that the actions and words of the Government leave to be desired.

    Perhaps the most important constituency work that we do as Members of Parliament is meeting students from schools and colleges. Whether they are little ones in years 1 and 2, arriving in their hi-vis jackets, or sixth-formers who are passionate about the world on which they are about to have a say, it is a huge honour to speak to so many of them and to hear about their worries, their concerns and their hope for the world. The one message I always take away, above all else, is their absolute determination to ensure that as politicians we take the climate crisis seriously and, more importantly, that we act.

    It is not enough for politicians to stand up and talk about the climate crisis; it is time to act. We have a responsibility to act, yet over the past decade of Conservative rule, we have seen an approach to the climate crisis that has too often put the need for short-term political gain ahead of the needs of our planet—the planet that our children and grandchildren will inherit.

    The irony is that the review’s second conclusion is that the UK

    “must act decisively to seize the economic opportunities”,

    but as the right hon. Member points out, the UK is now dropping back from the economic leadership role it once had on climate change and net zero across the world. If only the Government had listened to that message over the past decade, the country might now be in a different position. On Heathrow expansion, for example, they have not ruled out a third runway, despite the undeniable climate impact of the project.

    On onshore wind, British businesses have been leading the way in developing the newest turbines, yet because of the decade-long ban on further onshore wind developments, UK companies have been exporting that technology rather than building it for projects on the hills of the UK to join the ones we already have, like the one my brother can see from his house. The UK could have been a wind superpower by now. We know that more wind power means cheaper bills for our constituents, yet the Government did not act.

    Home insulation is another example. Homes in the UK leak three times as much heat as those in Europe, which means that energy bills are far higher than they should be. That adds to the cost of living crisis that our constituents face. The last Labour Government rolled out a plan to insulate new homes and retrofit old ones, but thanks to the Conservative Government’s promise to cut the “green crap”, the programme was massively scaled back.

    Almost a decade after coming to power, the Government realised the scale of the crisis and finally introduced a green homes grant programme. My constituents were overjoyed, as were local businesses, but what happened? The scheme was a disaster: it closed down early, and many small businesses lost a lot of money. No wonder the Public Accounts Committee wrote a report on the grant and called it a “slam dunk fail”—a fitting epitaph for the Government’s climate agenda, perhaps. The most frustrating part of that slam dunk fail is that I know from listening to my constituents that they want to see action on the climate crisis.

    Electric vehicles are another example. My inbox is full of emails from constituents who want to be able to buy electric cars or vans for their business, but who face hurdle after hurdle. From blocks of flats and residential streets to the strategic road network, there are so many gaps in the EV charging infrastructure that the Government are taking too long to address.

    There is inadequate support for local authorities and elected Mayors, who are doing their best. Let me give a couple of examples of good work that is going on. The Mayor of London’s ambition is to cut emissions and pollution and to move to net zero. It is useful to know that all new bus contracts in London include a requirement to use zero-emission buses. My council, Hounslow, has done a lot of work on climate change: all new council homes built will be ultra-low emission, for example. But local elected leaders need national leadership, they need tools and sometimes they need funding from the Government, and too many of them say that they are not getting it. Unfortunately, short-termism and austerity have been the Government’s approach to net zero, which is why I believe the UK has been failing.

    I am sure Conservative Members will ask what a Labour Government would do. No doubt my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) will cover that, but I am very pleased that my right hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster North (Edward Miliband) has set out the bold action that a Labour Government would take to tackle the climate crisis. We would create Great British Energy to champion green and clean energy, we would invest in wind power, we would insulate 19 million homes, we would lower bills, we would improve our energy security, and, most important, we would work to tackle the climate crisis.

    I think back to the dozens of students I have heard from throughout my constituency who are desperate for the Government, and indeed the world, to do much more to tackle the climate crisis. Many of them will be voting in the next general election, and the rest will vote in subsequent general elections. We owe it to them to go beyond words and to take action. It is nearly four years since the House declared a climate emergency, and I was proud to be an MP at that time. We know that we are living in a climate emergency: we see the flash floods, the displacement and the degradation of biodiversity across the planet, and we see the implications of all those developments. We can all see the damage that is being done. What we need to do is act now, but it is such a shame that action was not taken a decade ago.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-05.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what comparative assessment his Department has made of the potential damage to housing and infrastructure and loss of life that would result from an aircraft crashing on approach or arrival at Heathrow and Gatwick Airports.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    For people living and working near airports, safety is best achieved by ensuring the safe operation of aircraft in flight.However, in areas of greater risk, we seek to control the number of people at risk through the Public Safety Zone (PSZ) system.Public Safety Zones are areas of land at the ends of the runways at the busiest airports, within which development is restricted in order to control the number of people on the ground at risk of death or injury in the event of an aircraft accident on take-off or landing. The implementation of Public Safety Zone policy at civil airports is based on modelling work carried out using appropriate aircraft accident data to determine the level of risk to people on the ground around airports.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to ensure that refugees admitted to the UK from Syria are provided with the necessary support to enable them to integrate into British society.

    Richard Harrington

    The Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement scheme is based on need and prioritises those who cannot be supported effectively in the region. Local authorities are expected to provide refugees that they resettle with a 12 month support package which is tailored according to their individual needs. As well as accommodation and addressing any medical and social care needs, this also includes cultural integration and English language tuition. This is funded using the overseas aid budget as it is giving support to refugees that would otherwise be provided overseas.

    At the Spending Review, the Government committed £129 million to assist with local authority costs over years 2-5 of the scheme. This will be allocated on a tariff basis over four years, tapering from £5,000 per person in their second year in the UK, to £1,000 per person in year five. There will also be a special cases fund to assist the most vulnerable refugees. This is a substantial level of funding which will enable local authorities to support these vulnerable people as they rebuild their lives in safe and secure surroundings, among supportive communities in the UK.

    We are working with offers of support from community groups and inidividuals to see how we can best take them up to further help people settle and integrate, and, where possible, find employment in the UK.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-03-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps her Department is taking to (a) promote the study of creative subjects in secondary schools and (b) address the skills shortage in the UK creative industry sector.

    Nick Gibb

    All schools are required to provide a broad and balanced curriculum. The Government recognises that creative arts are an integral part of a child’s education. They develop skills that are important to our economy and help prepare children for adult life.

    The national curriculum sets out our expectations of what pupils should be taught and we have reformed GCSE and A level qualifications in a range of subjects, including art and design, music, drama, dance and design & technology. We have made significant changes in particular to design and technology, making this a better preparation for young people to progress into careers in a wide range of engineering and design fields.

    Our reforms to technical and vocational education incentivise schools and colleges to teach only those qualifications that meet rigorous quality criteria, develop the skills and knowledge that employers need and enable young people to progress into employment. For 16-18 year olds this includes qualifications in creative subjects that will equip them to apply for a range of jobs in the creative industries.

    In November, the Government announced further reforms to technical and professional education that will simplify the skills system and ensure it is understood and valued by employers. The Government will simplify and streamline the number of qualifications so that individuals have a clear set of routes which allow for progression into skilled employment. An independent panel, chaired by Lord Sainsbury, is developing proposals for these reforms and they will report to Government this spring‎.

    In December 2014, the Secretary of State announced funding for a new careers and enterprise company. This employer-led, independent company is strengthening links between employers, schools and colleges and careers and enterprise organisations to inspire young people, assisting them with taking control of their own futures and helping to address skills shortages. The provision of high-quality careers guidance for all young people is a key part of this Government’s commitment to delivering real social justice.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, at what stage in the decision making process regarding a third runway at Heathrow Airport he plans to bring forward legislative proposals on that matter.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    On 14 December 2015, the Government formally announced that it accepted the Airports Commission’s case for new runway capacity in the South East, as well as the Commission’s three shortlisted schemes. At the same time, it was also announced that the Department for Transport would undertake a package of further work which it anticipates will conclude over the summer. Alongside this, they would prepare an airports national policy statement as the framework for implementing decisions on airport capacity in line with the Planning Act 2008.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-04-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what progress the Government has made on its commitment to enshrine the Paris climate deal into UK law.

    Andrea Leadsom

    The UK is already playing its part in delivering the Paris climate deal, through its contribution to meeting EU climate and energy targets and through its domestic climate framework set out in the Climate Change Act. In addition, the Government believes we need to take the step of enshrining the global goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions into UK law. As a first step, our independent advisors, the Committee on Climate Change, are looking at the implications of the Paris commitments. The Committee has said that it will report in the autumn, and we will consider carefully the recommendations.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will introduce a compulsory module on understanding the needs and risks of vulnerable road users to the Driver Certificate of Professional Competence syllabus.

    Andrew Jones

    The Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (Driver CPC) was purposely designed so that drivers and their employers can decide what type of training is best for the individual. This flexibility ensures that personal training needs are met. Nevertheless, the Government recognises the importance of drivers understanding the needs and risks of vulnerable road users (VRUs). DVSA guidance on Driver CPC course approval therefore encourages training providers to include VRU content within periodic training courses where appropriate.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Attorney General

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-11.

    To ask the Attorney General, what recent steps the CPS has taken to improve the conviction rate for violence against women and girls.

    Robert Buckland

    I refer the Hon. Member to the answer I gave to the oral question from the Rt. Hon. Member for Delyn earlier today

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of whether paragraph 20 of Schedule 9 of the Income Support (General) Regulations 1987 accurately reflects the real costs borne by a claimant who takes a boarder into their home.

    Priti Patel

    There has been no such assessment.