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 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what account the Government’s forthcoming review of the night noise regulations for Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports will take of the WHO Europe’s recommendation that noise at night should not exceed 40 dB Leq.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The WHO’s 2009 Night Noise Guidelines for Europe do not refer solely to noise from aviation, but are based on the Lnight,outside indicator which measures the average noise that individuals are exposed to over all nights of a year – including from all transport sources and non transport sources such as industry and the neighbourhood.

    One of the environmental objectives of the current night flight restrictions is to limit and where possible reduce the number of people significantly affected by aircraft noise at night. This is based on the measure of the area and number of people within the 6.5 hour night quota period contours, and in particular the 55dB LAeq contour. This is the threshold also used in the WHO Night Noise Guidelines for Europe. This is also consistent with the Government’s overall policy on aviation noise to avoid significant adverse impacts.

    The Government’s proposals for the night flight restrictions from October 2017 will continue to take account of the latest evidence on the health impacts of night flights.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-02-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the effect of the palliative care currency will be on statutory funding for children’s hospices.

    Ben Gummer

    NHS England is responsible for the annual grant to children’s hospices and for determining how it will be allocated each year. The palliative care currency is designed to provide a basis for local commissioning discussions, by clearly identifying the costs of care. The currency is being tested by NHS England locally, to ensure it makes sense to commissioners and providers, and the results will be published later in the year. The intention is that there will be an appropriate transition to local commissioning of children’s hospices, but they have pledged to continue the grant until a sustainable alternative means of local funding is in effect.

  • 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 2016-03-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether his Department’s work on assessing the three airport options proposed by the Airport’s Commission includes a review of the safety and security risks associated with an (a) additional or extended runway at Heathrow and (b) additional runway at Gatwick Airport.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Government continues to consider the large amount of very detailed analysis contained in the Airports Commission’s final report before taking any decisions on next steps.

  • 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 2016-03-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many emergency landings there have been at Heathrow Airport in the last five years.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department does not collect data on how many emergency landings there have been at Heathrow Airport. However if serious enough, such incidents would be counted amongst data for safety related events. These are defined as an event which endanger or which, if not corrected or addressed, could endanger an aircraft, its occupants or any other person. They have to be reported to the Civil Aviation Authority as part of the Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme (MORS).

    Occurrence reporting is now covered by (EU) Regulation No 376/2014. The Regulation requires that the reporting, analysis and follow-up to such occurrences remain confidential. However, the Regulation does permit information to be released on request to interested parties that have a genuine safety related need for the information. An application can be made at www.caa.co.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 2016-05-03.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, for what reasons her Department acquired the land for the new Nishkam School site in West London before planning permission for that school was granted; and whether the valuation of that land was based on an assumption that planning permission would be granted.

    Edward Timpson

    The Syon Lane site was acquired by the Department for Communities and Local Government on behalf of the Education Funding Agency (EFA) as a permanent site for Nishkam School West London. When full, the school will provide 1,400 places for local children.

    Where possible, sites for new free schools are secured with exchange subject to planning approval. The decision to proceed with the purchase was taken following confirmation from Hounslow Local Planning Authority that the proposal to develop a school on the site would be consistent with local planning policies, so an argument could be made for such a development.

    The land valuation undertaken to inform the purchase took account of its designation as Metropolitan Open Land and an estimation of the value of the land should its planning status change to permit the construction of a school building.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-10-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many drivers have avoided disqualification from driving within the last year by pleading the loss of their licence would cause exceptional hardship.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    Information about drivers who have not been disqualified from driving as a result of a court accepting that disqualification would lead to exceptional hardship is not held centrally and can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

    The Government is committed to making sure that sentencing for those who kill or cause serious injury on the roads is proportionate within the context of our wider sentencing framework. It is our intention to commence a consultation on driving offences and penalties before the end of the year.

  • 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 2016-01-18.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, when he plans to publish the aircraft noise attitudes survey carried out by Ipsos Mori on his behalf; and how he plans to use the findings of that survey to inform aircraft noise policy.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Government is currently analysing the results of the survey carried out by IPSOS Mori to produce a report, which will be independently peer reviewed. The Government hopes to publish a report later this year on the findings.

    The report along with other relevant robust evidence will be used to inform the Government in setting out its aviation noise policy.

  • Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Ruth Cadbury – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ruth Cadbury on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the planned increase in stamp duty on the ability of people to purchase a retirement property in advance of selling their primary home.

    Mr David Gauke

    From 1 April 2016 higher rates of SDLT will be charged on purchases of additional residential properties, such as second homes and buy-to-let properties. The higher rates will be 3 percentage points above the current SDLT rates. This is part of the Government’s commitment to supporting home ownership and first-time buyers.

    The Government has carefully considered the case where a purchaser buys a new main home in advance of selling an old one. Where there is a temporary overlap between replacing and selling a main residence, the Government intends that higher rates will apply but the purchaser will be entitled to a refund of the higher amounts when they dispose of their previous main residence within 18 months.

    The Government has consulted on the changes to ensure they are introduced in a fair way. The final policy design will be confirmed at Budget on 16 March 2016.