UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Rishi Sunak – 2022 Speech to the CBI Conference

    Rishi Sunak – 2022 Speech to the CBI Conference

    The speech made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, to the CBI Conference held on 21 November 2022.

    Tony, let me start by saying thank you to you and your team.

    The CBI is a valued institution in this country…

    …and a powerful voice for business.

    And let me thank all of you…

    Because I know things are tough right now.

    You rightly want to know what you can expect from me.

    You saw what mattered to me when I was Chancellor, with policies like furlough.

    Acting with empathy. In the national interest.

    Above all, being bold, decisive, and radical.

    Now let me tell you what I want to do as Prime Minister.

    I said on the steps of Downing Street that I would put stability and confidence at the heart of this government’s agenda.

    And last week we did that…

    …with a plan to grip inflation and balance the books.

    I said I would bring fairness and compassion to help the most vulnerable.

    And we’ve done that too…

    …not just with record increases in pensions and welfare…

    ….and help for people’s energy bills…

    …but by controlling inflation.

    Because the best way to help people…

    …is by stopping mortgages, rents, and food prices from spiralling out of control.

    Re-establishing stability is the critical first step.

    But there’s so much more we need to do.

    I’m not just here to solve problems.

    I want to build a better country.

    Where we get inflation down and grow the economy.

    Where we cut NHS waiting times and improve the quality of care.

    Where we invest more in schools and give every child a world-class education.

    And critical to achieving all this…

    ….is innovation.

    That’s my theme today.

    And a defining focus of my government.

    Why innovation matters

    I sometimes worry that when people hear the word ‘innovation’, all they think of are the latest gadgets – a smarter watch, better tv, or faster car.

    But to me, innovation is much more about new ideas, new ways of doing things that drive economic and social progress.

    The product of creativity and ingenuity…

    …and what Roosevelt called ‘bold, persistent experimentation.’

    I want to lead a country where that mindset and that culture of innovation…

    …permeates every aspect of what we do.

    Where it’s at the heart of our economic policy…

    …and at the heart of our vision for public services.

    The question is – how do we do that?

    First, we need to harness innovation to drive economic growth.

    Second, we need to embed innovation in our public services – especially our NHS.

    Third, we need to teach people the skills to become great innovators.

    Harnessing Innovation to drive economic growth

    First, growth.

    Tony, you’ve rightly challenged us to be more ambitious for growth.

    Well, there’s one factor above all that drives growth.

    Over the last 50 years, innovation was responsible for around half of the UK’s productivity increases.

    But the rate of increase has slowed significantly since the financial crisis.

    This difference explains almost all our productivity gap with the United States.

    How do we fire up the innovation engine?

    We believe that the very act of creativity and exploration is itself a reward…

    …so it starts with government investment in basic science and research.

    In a challenging time, when we are making difficult decisions on public spending…

    …in last week’s autumn statement, we protected the budget for research and development.

    £20bn – almost a fifth of our entire capital budget, the highest level of R&D this country has ever seen.

    And we’re investing in high-risk, high-reward research with the new Advanced Research and Invention Agency.

    But more important than what government does is what you do.

    It’s private sector innovations that really drive growth.

    You’d expect me to say that, I’m a Conservative – but it’s true.

    That’s why the Autumn Statement cut taxes to encourage larger companies to do more research and development.

    Its why we’re going to allow businesses to claim R&D tax relief on pure maths and cloud computing.

    And its why we’re absolutely committed to using our new Brexit freedoms…

    …to create the most pro-innovation regulatory environment in the world…

    …in sectors like life sciences, financial services, AI and data.

    But any credible strategy also needs to support fast growing businesses…

    …those firms disproportionately responsible for our future growth.

    Turning million-pound businesses into billion-pound businesses and turning billion-pound businesses into ten-billion-pound companies

    …will create good well paying  jobs for the British people.

    But too often, those firms can’t access the finance they need.

    That’s why we’re radically reforming the regulation of our insurance and pensions sectors, as well as our listings rules…

    …to release a flood of new funding for exciting, innovative businesses.

    And we’ll need to go further.

    But this isn’t just about what large businesses and financial markets can do.

    We want to support small businesses to innovate, too.

    On every high street, in every market town, every day we rely on brilliant local businesses from the greengrocer to the dry cleaner to the local plumber.

    We should be ambitious for their future too.

    The real prize is supporting them to innovate.

    And that’s exactly what we’re doing with new initiatives like Help to Grow and Made Smarter.

    So make no mistake – our most pressing task when it comes to growth is stability and controlling inflation.

    But that will never be the limit of our ambition.

    The more we innovate, the more we’ll grow – and we have a plan for both.

    An innovation culture in our public services

    Second, we also need to create a culture of innovation in our public services.

    Now I grew up in an NHS family.

    It’s in my blood.

    And as your Prime Minister, I will always protect an NHS free at the point of use.

    And that’s why, in a budget where we had to make savings overall….

    …we didn’t cut the funding for health and social care….

    …we increased it.

    By £8 billion.

    So let no-one ever doubt our commitment to the brilliant men and women who work in our NHS.

    But our ambition for our country’s most important public service cannot be measured solely by the money we spend…

    …but by the quality of care every patient receives.

    We all want it to be easier for people to see their family GP.

    We don’t want our loved ones waiting so long for ambulances…

    …or for the operations they need.

    But better care requires innovation.

    Now In part that means new drugs and new technologies.

    And this country should be proud of how we are leading the way.

    Not just with that extraordinary Covid vaccine.

    But with robots assisting surgery…

    ….doctors being trained with Virtual Reality headsets…

    …and drones transporting prescription medicines to patients in remote locations.

    Medical technologies like these are only the most visible form of innovation.

    But we also need to radically innovate in how we do things.

    That’s how we will really improve the quality and speed of care and make the money we invest in the NHS go further.

    To do that, we’re opening Community Diagnostic Centres to deliver millions more tests, checks and scans…

    ….close to home and without having to arrange multiple appointments.

    And our new elective surgical hubs will offer hundreds of thousands of patients…

    …quicker access to the most common procedures.

    But we need to go further still.

    We want to give patients genuine choice about where and when to access care.

    And those choices need to be informed by radical transparency about the performance of our healthcare system.

    We’re also making sure the NHS has the workforce it needs for the future…

    …with the right numbers of doctors and nurses in the right places…

    …as well as thinking creatively about what new roles and capabilities we need…

    …in the healthcare workforce of the future.

    When it comes to the NHS, we all share the same ambition…

    …to give everybody in the country the best possible care, free at the point of use.

    But to deliver it, we need to be bold and radical in challenging conventional wisdom.

    And that’s what we’ll do.

    Giving the people the skills to become great innovators

    Now, third, there can be no innovation unless people have the skills to innovate.

    That starts with our schools.

    So last week we announced an extra £2bn in each of the next two years.

    But funding is not enough.

    There is no responsibility as Prime Minister that I feel more deeply, than how we develop a truly world-class education system…

    …giving every child in our country the best chance in life and preparing them to enter into a rapidly changing world.

    The Times were right to challenge us about what that looks like.

    And we are asking ourselves radical searching, questions.

    About the curriculum – because young people need to enter the modern economy equipped with the right knowledge and skills.

    And about technology – because we want to help children engage and learn better and save teachers’ time.

    We also need to end once and for all the mistaken idea that learning is something you finish at 18.

    So we will also deliver our Lifetime Skills Guarantee to help people of any age retrain and acquire new skills.

    I believe, in the very core of my being, that education is the closest thing we have to a silver bullet in public policy.

    It’s the most transformative thing we can do for our people…

    …something you as employers know all too well…

    …and I am determined to get this right.

    But to make this country a true island of innovation, we also need to attract the best and brightest from around the world.

    So we will unapologetically create one of the world’s most attractive visa regimes for entrepreneurs and highly skilled people.

    And one of the areas where we need to be most ambitious – is AI – Artificial Intelligence.

    Because this isn’t just another new technology.

    It’s a general purpose technology…

    …like the invention of the steam engine and the computer chip…

    …with the potential to transform every aspect of our lives.

    So we cannot allow the world’s top AI talent to be drawn to America or China.

    That’s why – building on the AI scholarships and masters conversion courses I instigated as Chancellor…

    …we are launching a programme to identify and attract the world’s top 100 young talents on AI.

    Less “build it and they will come” and more “let them come and they will build it”.

    But we must be honest with ourselves.

    Part of the reason we ended free movement of labour was to rebuild public consent in our immigration system.

    If we’re going to have a system that allows businesses to access the best and brightest from around the world…

    ….we need to do more to give the British people trust and confidence that the system works and is fair.

    That means tackling illegal migration.

    And that’s what I’m determined to do.

    So, to conclude – innovation matters.

    It matters because it creates more jobs, higher wages, and better opportunities for people.

    It matters because it improves our schools and NHS.

    And, over the long-term, by boosting growth and creating more productive public services…

    …innovation is how we will cut taxes for people and businesses.

    That’s why I am placing innovation at the heart of my governing agenda

    And despite the challenges we face – I am optimistic about the future.

    Because the golden thread of our national story has always been innovation.

    The idea that what’s yet to be discovered is surely even greater than all that’s come before.

    I want the United Kingdom to be a place of learning, discovery, and imagination.

    Of potential realised and ambition fulfilled.

    That’s how we’ll improve the lives of all our people.

    And as your Prime Minister, that’s what I’m going to do.

    Thank you.

  • David Alton – 1982 Parliamentary Question on the Christmas Bonus for Pensioners

    David Alton – 1982 Parliamentary Question on the Christmas Bonus for Pensioners

    The parliamentary question asked by David Alton, the then Liberal MP for Liverpool Edge Hill, in the House of Commons on 16 November 1982.

    Mr. Alton

    Following the Prime Minister’s statement last night that pensioners should not be reduced to penury, will she confirm that had the £10 Christmas bonus kept pace with inflation it should now be about £30? Does she agree with what a Liverpool pensioner said to me recently, that if she does not increase this pitiful sum it could reasonably be said that Scrooge is alive and well and living in Downing Street?

    The Prime Minister

    My comments last night referred to the savings of non-index-linked pensioners having been reduced by a policy of inflation over the years. I said that those days were over; the pensioners were abused disgracefully by a policy of inflation over a decade.

    It is easy for the hon. Gentleman to ask for increases in the bonus, but they must be met out of the pockets of the working population. Every time that we put extra burdens on them or on industry we make it more difficult for industry to be competitive. The hon. Gentleman knows of the increases in the national insurance contribution that we have had to make this year. It would not be wise to put an extra burden on the working population.

  • Leo Docherty – 2022 Speech Made to the Moldova Support Platform

    Leo Docherty – 2022 Speech Made to the Moldova Support Platform

    The speech made by Leo Docherty, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Foreign Office, in Paris on 21 November 2022.

    Thank you to the co-chairs for bringing us together again – in particular, our host, Foreign Minister Colonna and also to Minister Baerbock and Foreign Minister Aurescu. Thank you Deputy Prime Minister Popescu.

    I am very pleased to represent the United Kingdom today at this third Moldova Support Platform conference.

    As we witness unrelenting Russian aggression in Ukraine, and its devastating impact on the people of Ukraine, we also see the harrowing consequences it is having beyond Ukraine’s borders, in particular on Moldova. The resilience and solidarity demonstrated by the people of Moldova, under President Sandu’s leadership, are truly inspiring. For the UK, it is an irrefutable duty to join with our allies and partners in helping Moldova to overcome some of the worst impacts of Russia’s war. As winter arrives, we must continue to demonstrate our unity in standing with Moldova, its democratically-elected government and its people, and their right to choose their own future.

    In October I was honoured to visit Moldova. I saw and heard for myself how this small country with a big heart had welcomed hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees, many of whom continue to be supported by the Moldovan people and their government. President Sandu, Foreign Minister Popescu and their colleagues explained the difficulties their country was facing, including energy insecurity caused by Russia’s deliberate disruption of the gas supply, soaring inflation and security threats, vividly illustrated by Russian missiles violating Moldovan air space with utter disregard for civilians and their safety.

    Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, since the launch of this process in April, the UK has been pleased to co-chair, with Romania, the anti-corruption working group. Our coordination with the Moldovan Ministry of Justice and other key agencies in Moldova has been exceptionally valuable. We will present the working group’s latest report, focused on concrete results, this afternoon.

    I am pleased to report that the UK’s own contribution to anti-corruption and transparency work – an additional £12m over three years – is taking shape, providing support where it is needed the most and complementing the efforts of the Moldovan government and our partners.

    We also seek to assist Moldova in other sectors, including direct support for its humanitarian efforts. Our humanitarian contribution this year – including £29.45 million regionally and £10.8 million directly to Moldova – is helping crisis-affected refugees and their Moldovan host families, and has helped ease the pressure on the Moldovan government.

    Under the auspices of NATO’s Tailored Support Package we are delivering support that includes the NATO-sponsored Professional Development Programme, English Language Training, Strategic Communications and Military Engineering along with providing a range of training courses. Our other programmes are tailored to support Moldova in its hour of need, by helping increase energy efficiency, and by working alongside partners to support reforms and capacity-building that will help build Moldovan resilience.

    At his meeting with Foreign Minister Popescu in London a few weeks ago, the British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly reiterated the UK’s commitment to stand by Moldova. We will continue to take every opportunity we see to reinforce our support.

    We must clearly show that we are resolute and united in resisting Russian aggression and its efforts to defeat democracy.

    Finally, Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, through the Moldova Support Platform and other fora, we will continue to play our part in a collective and coordinated response, both to bring about concrete short-term support and to identify long-term solutions to ensure Moldova’s stability and promote greater European integration. The people of Moldova deserve no less.

  • Alok Sharma – 2022 Speech at the COP27 Closing Plenary

    Alok Sharma – 2022 Speech at the COP27 Closing Plenary

    The speech made by Alok Sharma, the outgoing COP26 President, at Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt on 20 November 2022.

    Thank you Mr President to you and your team for all your work. And I also want to thank the secretariat and the Chairs of the subsidiary bodies.

    It hasn’t been easy. But I want to begin by recognising the progress on loss and damage. This is historic.

    The decision that we have taken here has the potential to support and increase that support for the most vulnerable.

    And I very much welcome that.

    And the scale and the range of needs will require contributions from the widest range of sources and parties.

    Of course the critical work now lies ahead to ensure that potential is realised.

    But friends, and I have to say this, this is not a moment of unqualified celebration.

    Many of us came here to safeguard the outcomes that we secured in Glasgow, and to go further still.

    In our attempts to do that, we have had a series of very challenging conversations over the past few days.

    Indeed those of us who came to Egypt to keep 1.5 degrees alive,

    and to respect what every single one of us agreed to in Glasgow,

    have had to fight relentlessly to hold the line.

    We have had to battle to build on one of the key achievements of Glasgow.

    The call on all Parties to revisit and strengthen their Nationally Determined Contributions.

    We have ultimately reiterated that call here.

    And it is critical that commitment is delivered by all of us, including by the major emitters in this room who did not come forward this year.

    But we also wanted to take a definitive step forward.

    We joined with many Parties to propose a number of measures that would have contributed to this.

    Emissions peaking before 2025, as the science tells us is necessary.

    Not in this text.

    Clear follow-through on the phase down of coal.

    Not in this text.

    A clear commitment to phase out all fossil fuels.

    Not in this text.

    And the energy text, weakend, in the final minutes.

    Friends, I said in Glasgow that the pulse of 1.5 degrees was weak.

    Unfortunately, it remains on life support.

    And all of us need to look ourselves in the mirror, and consider if we have fully risen to that challenge over the past two weeks.

    Colleagues, I will not be in this chair at COP28, when our ambition, and our implementation, is tested in the Global Stocktake year.

    But I assure you, indeed I promise you, that if we do not step up soon,

    and rise above these minute-to-midnight battles to hold the line,

    we will all be found wanting.

    Each of us will have to explain that, to our citizens, to the world’s most vulnerable countries and communities,

    and ultimately to the children and grandchildren to whom many of us now go home.

    Thank you.

  • Michael Heseltine – 1982 Speech on Department of Environment Finances and New Enterprise Zones

    Michael Heseltine – 1982 Speech on Department of Environment Finances and New Enterprise Zones

    The speech made by Michael Heseltine, the then Secretary of State for the Environment, in the House of Commons on 15 November 1982.

    With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement about certain public expenditure programmes for the Department of the Environment. This follows the statement made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 8 November. Details are being laid in the Vote Office. I shall also announce the designation of new enterprise zones.

    As my right hon. and learned Friend said, for the first time since 1977 a Government’s public expenditure plans have not had to be revised upwards from one year to the next. The total of planned expenditure for my own programmes has also remained broadly the same. However, as a result of the considerable success of the programme of sales of council houses and of other assets, significant additional resources are now being realised by local government. In 1983–84 these sales should be worth about £1,750 million. This allows for a marked increase in certain capital programmes.

    I deal first with housing. For the current year I have asked local authorities to accelerate their capital programmes in order to spend closer to the national provision. I have offered additional capital allocations for all authorities which need them. Local authorities can increase their expenditure on home improvement grants this year without limit. The Government agree with the proposal—endorsed by The House Builders Federation—that local authorities should buy completed, or nearly completed, low-cost homes direct from house builders for sale, under shared ownership arrangements, to first-time buyers and those on the waiting list. I urge local authorities to promote these schemes.
    I have also discussed with the Housing Corporation the effective use of additional resources this year. I have agreed an increase of £150 million in the corporation’s cash imit for 1982–83 to £680 million. This allows additional expenditure on fair rent, hostel and low-cost home ownership schemes and the refinancing of private borrowing guaranteed by the corporation.

    For 1983–84 the gross capital provision for housing will be increased from this year’s provision of £3,190 million to £3,243 million. This is about £340 million above the expected outturn for the current year, taking account of the forecast additional spend from my statement today. It will sustain a substantial increase in construction and improvement activity. I have already announced the continuation of the higher improvement grant rates until the end of 1983–84. I shall be taking additional steps to assist local authorities to meet the resulting demand.

    I deal now with other Department of the Environment programmes. For the current year, 1982–83, local authorities have been invited to seek any additional allocations they need for derelict land, urban programme expenditure, or other projects. The grant to the Sports Council is also being increased to allow increased capital expenditure, particularly in communities where the needs are greatest and where the development of small facilities can provide a basis for partnership between voluntary organisations and local government. The Minister for the Arts and I are making a further grant of £5 million to the national heritage memorial fund. I will also provide additions to the grants to the Nature Conservancy Council and the Countryside Commission.

    A breakdown of Department of the Environment programmes for 1983–84 is shown in the figures placed in the Vote Office. The external financing limit for water authorities will allow capital investment to be increased from £632 million to £677 million. Provision for gross capital expenditure on local environmental services will be £605 million compared with forecast outturn this year of £481 million. Within the smaller programmes there will be an increase in the heritage, conservation and sports budgets from £156 million to £165 million.

    I shall be concentrating further additional resources on the urban and derelict land programmes. The House will be aware that I recently launched a new initiative under the urban and derelict land programmes and invited local authorities to submit viable schemes, provided that they attract substantial funds from the private sector. The response from local government and the private sector has greatly exceeded expectations. We have bids of £275 million from the public sector put forward in conjunction with a potential further £900 million of investment from the private sector, spread over a number of years. Our initial appraisal shows that in the first year a public contribution of £85 million could be necessary. I have therefore increased accordingly the £70 million originally earmarked. Substantial private sector funds will flow as a consequence of this injection of Government support. The balance of both public and private expenditure will be invested over subsequent years.

    In addition, I am increasing the remaining special budgets for the urban and derelict land programmes. Including the £85 million for the joint schemes, the urban programme will be increased from an expected outturn of —280 million this year to —348 million next year, the derelict land programme will be increased from £59 million to £75 million; and the resources of the urban development corporations of London and Merseyside will be increased from £64 million to £67 million. In total, the public expenditure provision for these programmes next year will be £490 million—an increase of £87 million or 22 per cent. on the likely outturn for this year.

    As a further part of our efforts to restore economic health to rundown industrial areas, I can tell the House the Government’s decisions on the designation of new enterprise zones in England.

    My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced on 27 July that the Government intended to designate 11 new zones, seven of them in England. More than 50 English authorities have submitted bids, many of high quality.

    As a result, the Government have decided that, in England, we should go ahead with nine new zones; in Allerdale and North-East Lancashire in the North-West; Rotherham and Scunthorpe in Yorkshire and Humberside; Telford in the West Midlands; North-East Derbyshire and Wellingborough in the East Midlands; Middlesbrough in the North-East; and in North-West Kent, including parts of Rochester, Gillingham and Gravesham. The Government have also decided to extend the existing zones at Speke in Liverpool and Wakefield in West Yorkshire. There will be further detailed discussions.

    These programmes give priority to capital expenditure. Significant additional resources arise from the success of local government—which I commend—in selling council houses to their tenants and in realising other assets. The announcements today underline our commitment to the inner cities and to the restoration and improvement of some of the most rundown and depressed industrial areas of our society, and there is an enhanced opportunity for capital investment by much of local government.

  • Richard Douglas – 1982 Parliamentary Question on North Sea Oil and Gas

    Richard Douglas – 1982 Parliamentary Question on North Sea Oil and Gas

    The parliamentary question asked by Richard Douglas, the then Labour MP for Dunfermline West, in the House of Commons on 15 November 1982.

    Mr. Douglas

    asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the number of North Sea fields which he expects to be in production in 1984 and the anticipated aggregate flows of oil and gas.

    Mr. Gray

    It is expected that by the end of 1984, 25 oilfields and seven gas fields will be in production in the United Kingdom section of the North Sea. Projections of production for oil and gas in 1984 and beyond are necessarily subject to wide ranges of uncertainty. Projections of oil production in 1984 given in the 1982 Brown Book are 95 million to 125 million tonnes.

    Mr. Douglas

    I thank the Minister for that reply. Is there not a danger that, unless we get a reasonable and sensible policy, we shall become net oil importers by the late 1980s? Does he concede—his right hon. and learned Friend alluded to this matter a few weeks ago—that we must sort out the tax regime? What proposals on that matter does he envisage in the forthcoming Finance Bill?

    Mr. Gray

    The hon. Gentleman has been a Member long enough to know that at this stage there is no way in which I or my right hon. and learned Friend could comment on his thinking on tax matters. However, it is true to say that probably no other industry has a closer dialogue with the Government than the oil industry. The various representations made both within the industry and the House are carefully noted.

    The future prospects for the North Sea are extremely bright. The seventh round was probably the most successful that we have had, and we expect great enthusiasm for the eighth round of licensing. The fact that the North Sea is in such a politically stable area is encouraging to the private sector.

    Mr. Douglas

    Why, then, are the Government selling Britoil?

    Mr. Chapman

    I appreciate that any estimate of oil and gas reserves must be rough, but have such estimates been revised upwards or downwards in the past three years in the light of new or no discoveries?

    Mr. Gray

    The Brown Book, which contains most of the North Sea activities and predictions, is revised on an annual basis.

    Mr. Hooley

    Is it correct that we are rapidly moving to the production of 50 per cent. more oil than we need for domestic purposes? If so, is not that a dangerous depletion policy?

    Mr. Gray

    I do not think so. That reflects the success of exploration in the North Sea. The hon. Gentleman should always bear in mind that if we reversed this policy and restricted development in the North Sea that could have a serious effect on many jobs.

  • Bill Esterson – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    Bill Esterson – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    The speech made by Bill Esterson, the Labour MP for Sefton Central, in the House of Commons on 18 November 2022.

    I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham) on bringing forward an important and heartfelt piece of legislation. I hope, as the Minister said, that he is successful more quickly this time than he was with his private Member’s Bill on smoking in cars with children present, which he introduced some years ago. I remember it well, because I sat on the Children and Families Bill Committee and moved one of the amendments in his name, as he was not on the Committee. I spoke on it again on Report, and I was with him on the Delegated Legislation Committee where the legislation was implemented in the Smoke-free (Private Vehicles) Regulations 2015. I hope he is successful far more quickly, and I think the spirit of what the Minister said suggests that my hon. Friend can make enormous progress quickly.

    I add my thanks to Marie Curie and the TUC for the work they have done and the way they have informed this debate and for the evidence they have presented to my hon. Friend and the Minister. As my hon. Friend and the Minister said, the fact that 90,000 people die in poverty each year and that people of working age are dying, the effect that has on children and families and the challenges presented to people who are terminally ill mean that this issue must have our attention. I hope the Minister can convene other Ministers in the way that he said in short order and put in place some of the measures that he suggested can be done relatively quickly.

    In my hon. Friend’s Bill, he has proposed a series of pragmatic financial measures. The measures on the warm home discount and the energy company obligations speak for themselves in how the Bill is set out. He has told us about the high energy needs of people who are terminally ill, and clearly any help that can be given should be given. That brings me briefly to clause 3. The TUC’s Dying to Work campaign highlighted, as the Minister rightly said, that employers who do not act in the best interest of their workers need to be brought to account. I am grateful for his acknowledgement that the remedy of a tribunal is not an appropriate or practical way of addressing these problems. I am pleased that he said the objective should be for workers with a terminal diagnosis to be able to continue as long as possible, and that we will have that in Hansard, because it will form the basis of the discussions he mentioned.

    I welcome the Minister’s commitment, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North on bringing forward an incredibly important and powerful piece of legislation. I hope with all sincerity that he is successful in short order, and that the Minister is able to fulfil his promises.

    I welcome the Minister to his role as Science Minister, which he assured us earlier in the week he definitely is, and I believe it has now been confirmed.

  • George Freeman – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    George Freeman – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    The speech made by George Freeman, the Minister of State at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 18 November 2022.

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to respond immediately to the hon. Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham). I congratulate him, and thank him for bringing this important issue to the House’s attention. He has a distinguished record of bringing private Members’ Bills before the House and getting them put on the statute book, albeit on the slow wheels of this place. I, like all colleagues present, feel very strongly that private Members’ Bills days are not just for fun and games; they are a chance for Members to bring issues before the House, and for Governments and Oppositions to listen and see whether we can achieve some progress together. It is very much in that spirit that I come to the Dispatch Box today. I put on record my apologies to the Wymondham Access Group, which I was supposed to be meeting in my constituency today. I am sure its members will understand that this issue goes to the heart of many of the challenges they face.

    The hon. Member’s Bill seeks to tackle some very important issues faced by those suffering from terminal illnesses, many of whom experience real difficulties and really want to have as fulfilling and purposeful lives in the workplace for as long as they possibly can. I join him in paying tribute to Jacci Woodcock, whose story and campaign has been so inspiring.

    To put on record my experience, my dear childhood friend, Charlie Williams, died of a brain tumour a few years ago. I watched this incredibly fit young man cut down in the prime of his life, and I saw through him many of the issues highlighted by this campaign. I join the hon. Member in paying tribute to Mark, Cheryl and the others. Their work is genuinely inspiring and humbling. I look forward to going through the Bill and seeing how best we can deal with the issues that the hon. Member raises.

    As the Minister responsible for research, I am in some sense standing in today for the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake), who has responsibility for small business. However, research by Marie Curie—it has done great work—clearly shows that people with terminal illness often face a loss of income and increased pressure on their finances, adding to serious anxiety for them and their loved ones. Nobody wants that and we must do everything we can to try to avoid it.

    One in four people each year who need palliative care miss out on their entitlements, because their needs are not properly recognised and they are not referred to the right services. To tackle that issue, the Marie Curie campaign calls for a change in the way those care services are provided. Colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care are very aware of that and are working on it, albeit along with the wider pressures on the health system, particularly this winter, post-pandemic.

    The Bill essentially seeks to do two things. It seeks to require utility companies to provide financial support to customers with a terminal illness and to make provision about the employment rights of people with a terminal illness and for various connected purposes. The Bill is heavily supported by the TUC’s Dying to Work campaign, which has helpfully highlighted a lot of these issues on behalf of members. It seeks to change the law to provide additional employment protection for terminally ill workers.

    Dying to Work was set up following, and inspired by, the terrible case of Jacci Woodcock, a sales manager from Derbyshire who was forced out of her job after being diagnosed with terminal breast cancer. The truth is that many excellent employers around the country do everything they possibly can, rightly, in the best spirit of best business, to employ well and be flexible and look after those who are suffering. However, there are also bad employers who do not fulfil their responsibilities properly, as we heard in the previous debate. The Government face the classic problem of how to identify good practice and clamp down on bad practice, and how to identify the difference. Interestingly, in preparing for this debate, when I asked for the data—I am Minister for research, so it will be no surprise that I was keen to see the data—I found that there is, as ever, a lack of hard data on how many people are suffering, where, when and where the real gaps and problems are.

    Let me be clear that everyone in the Government, and I think in the House, absolutely agrees that we all must fulfil our duties of care to the most vulnerable in our society. That is precisely what the Bill seeks to do. My duty as Minister is to ensure that the measures in it are implementable and to work with the hon. Member for Stockton North to get that right. He is very aware of that, having done this before with his excellent ban on smoking in cars with children.

    I will deal with the points on energy and then on employment. The Government recognise that this is a hugely difficult time for people all across the country, particularly for energy customers facing hugely higher bills as a result of the shutdown and restart of the economy after the pandemic, as well as, particularly, the Ukraine war and the appalling invasion of Ukraine by Russia. That is why, even prior to the energy price guarantee, the Government announced £37 billion-worth of additional support last spring to help consumers with the impact of the unprecedented global gas price increase. Eight million of the most vulnerable households will see up to £1,200 of extra support in instalments across this autumn and winter, on top of the £400 energy support scheme that households are already benefiting from between October and March. The Government’s energy price guarantee will save the typical British household around £900 this winter.

    Turning to the warm home discount, which the hon. Member for Stockton North particularly focused on, it has been in place since 2011 and has provided more than £3.3 billion of total assistance to low-income and vulnerable households across Great Britain. We have extended that scheme until 2026 and expanded the spending envelope from around £350 million to £523 million per year. That figure will rise with inflation and, as a result, an extra 800,000 low-income households will receive rebates of £150 off their energy bills. Indeed, households have already started receiving those rebates from their energy suppliers.

    As before, we will provide rebates to about 1 million households where someone is in receipt of pension credit guarantee. Those households are likely to spend more time inside their homes, require higher temperatures and be more vulnerable to cold. Furthermore, under reforms we have introduced in England and Wales to improve targeting, around 560,000 more households in fuel poverty will receive rebates and around 160,000 more households with a long-term illness or disability will benefit each winter. I can see the hon. Gentleman nodding—he knows we are trying to get the right money to the right people.

    Incidentally, the reforms in England and Wales have resulted from use of innovative data matching between the Government and the obligated energy suppliers—data matching enabled by powers in the Digital Economy Act 2017 to help people in fuel poverty. That is an example of good legislation working. We have identified eligible households based on two key criteria: those on means-tested benefits or tax credits below a specific income, and those who live in a home with a high energy cost threshold. We have used the age, size and type of property to estimate its relative heating costs.

    As a result of those reforms, most eligible households will not have to take any action to receive the rebate. They will receive a Government letter explaining the scheme and will have their accounts automatically credited by their energy supplier.

    Paul Holmes (Eastleigh) (Con)

    The Minister is rightly outlining the support the Government have given to people, as well as acknowledging, as the hon. Member for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham) has done, that not all people who are terminally ill are getting the right services at the right time. Does he agree that the hospice sector, in particular the Mountbatten hospice in my constituency, but also hospices that provide services across all of the United Kingdom, are not only a key player in ensuring that people receive the services they need, but can be part of the solution in directing them to some of the support they need because of the cost of living crisis?

    George Freeman

    My hon. Friend makes an excellent point on behalf of the hospice sector, and Mountbatten hospice in particular. The hospice sector is key through its provision of not only care, but support to citizens at the most vulnerable time in their life. I join him in paying tribute to hospices, and I will come on to talk about some of the ways they contribute. Macmillan Cancer Care has done some interesting work on energy in particular.

    Customers on prepayment meters may receive a top-up voucher, and all payment types benefit as long as they have an account with a participating energy supplier. For eligible households where there is no data or we are unable to match, they receive a Government letter by mid-January, asking them to call a helpline and verify their eligibility. We are doing everything we can to try to reach out. That helpline opened on 14 November and has already started processing customers.

    The warm home discount provides further help beyond that £150 rebate. Under the industry initiatives element of the scheme, worth more than £40 million this year, several hundred thousand households receive help such as debt write-off, energy efficiency measures, financial assistance and benefit entitlement checks. All households helped under that element of the warm home discount also receive energy saving advice. Charities and businesses offering those services can provide genuinely life-changing packages, and we encourage everyone to pursue them.

    Low-income and vulnerable households, including those with a terminal illness, may be able to benefit under industry initiatives even if they are not eligible for the £150 rebate. Indeed, under those industry initiatives energy suppliers have worked with charities, including Macmillan Cancer Support, to provide particular help to people diagnosed with cancer.

    On energy efficiency, which was the second point raised by the hon. Member for Stockton North, while the Government, Ofgem and energy suppliers offer direct help with energy bills, we know that the best long-term solution is to improve the efficiency of people’s homes. That is why yesterday the Government announced a major new commitment to drive improvements in energy efficiency to bring down bills for households, businesses and the public sector with a clear ambition to reduce the UK’s total energy consumption from buildings and industry by at least 15% by 2030 against 2021 levels.

    To achieve that, a new energy efficiency taskforce will be charged with accelerating the delivery of energy efficiency across the economy, and new Government funding worth £6 billion will be made available from 2025 to 2028. That is in addition to the £6.6 billion committed to over this Parliament, of which just over half has already been allocated to significantly improve the least energy-efficient homes through our social housing decarbonation fund, the home upgrade grant and the local authority delivery scheme. I hope that he can see that we are trying again to focus that money on that most vulnerable cohort whom he has spoken for. Homes receiving energy efficiency measures under those schemes will benefit from average bill savings of between £300 and £700 a year based on an average energy bill of £2,500.

    I turn to the energy company obligation, which is a specific part of the hon. Member’s Bill. ECO, as it is known, is a regulation on larger energy suppliers to deliver energy bill savings through the installation of energy efficiency measures. Since the scheme started in 2013, about 3.5 million energy efficiency measures have been installed in about 2.4 million homes across Great Britain. Therefore, just under 10% of British households have lower energy bills as a direct result of ECO. This year, the Government extended the scheme until March 2026 and increased the spending envelope from about £640 million to £1 billion a year. That is focused on low-income and vulnerable households living in the least energy-efficient homes.

    Households can benefit either through means-tested benefits or if they are social housing tenants or identified as low-income and vulnerable by the local authority or energy supplier. That last element is known as ECO Flex. Energy suppliers can meet up to half their overall obligation through ECO Flex, which is focused on private tenure housing. Under the current iteration, we have introduced a route intended specifically to help households experiencing severe health issues—both mental health and physical disability—including terminal illness-related disabilities. Households who receive energy-efficiency measures under ECO will typically save about £600 a year. There are organisations helping low-income households who offer help under ECO Flex and warm home discount, and the Government recently announced a further expansion of that support with a supplementary ECO Plus scheme, which is worth a total of £1 billion from 2023 to March 2026 and will allow a broader set of households to benefit. We plan to publish a consultation on the detailed proposals later this month.

    I turn finally to employment rights, which is the final substantive clause of the Bill. Let me take the opportunity at the Dispatch Box, as a Minister in the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, to make it clear that the Government strongly expect and encourage all employers to treat people in such a situation with the care, sensitivity and compassion that we would all expect people we know to be treated with. Being a good employer and a good business means exactly that. People suffering from a terminal illness should not have to face any additional burdens as a result of their employment—not least fearing for their job—at a time when they are dealing with the very hardest illnesses and having to make plans for the end of their life.

    The Government fully support the objective of enabling employees with life-threatening conditions to continue working for as long as possible. One of the things that many people feel most strongly about on diagnosis is wanting to be able to carry on living their life for as long as they possibly can, and we owe it to them to make that possible. The hon. Member has been a great champion of that. The Equality Act 2010 provides that workers who are disabled due to chronic diseases or conditions are fully protected from any discriminatory treatment by their employers. In the overwhelming majority of cases, someone with a terminal illness will meet the definition for being disabled under the Act. I say, “the overwhelming majority”, but one thing that we might want to look at offline, as it were, is trying to ensure that that is everybody. Any kind of cancer, for example, is automatically regarded as a disability.

    Under employment law, a qualifying employee who is unfairly dismissed or forced to resign from a job because of a terminal illness may bring a claim of unfair dismissal against their employer. However—before the hon. Member for Stockton North asks me, as I suspect he will—I would be the first to accept that if one is in the late stages of a terminal disease, bringing a case to the employment tribunal is not for the faint-hearted. It is not, in many cases, a reasonable remedy, and given that, we need to think about how we can ensure that people are not being asked to rely on a remedy that, in practice, they will struggle to call on. Depending on the nature of the illness and its impact on them, they may also be able to bring a claim of disability discrimination under the Equality Act, but again, the same condition applies.

    The Equality Act goes further in relation to those whose illness renders them disabled: it places a clear statutory duty on employers to make reasonable adjustments for those with disabilities, quite rightly, so that they can access or remain in work. Reasonable adjustments can include making changes to the workplace, changing someone’s working arrangements, finding a different way to do something or providing reasonable equipment, services or support. Crucially, reasonable adjustments are specific to an individual employee, and making a reasonable adjustment is not a one-off requirement; it requires review, adaptation and ongoing support as people’s needs change and develop. Equally, it is not a limitless requirement; it has to be reasonable in all circumstances, taking a variety of factors into consideration.

    More generally, where an adjustment is not directly required because of a disability, for many people an additional bit of flexibility in the workplace is crucial to allowing them to deliver their job. Employees with 26 weeks’ service already benefit from the right to request flexible working, which allows them to ask for a change in their hours or location of work. Most employers rightly and honourably go further than their minimum statutory duties. It is the bad employers that we need to get on top of. I was pleased that the Government were able to support the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Bill, which deals with that issue, on Second Reading on 28 October. If that Bill successfully gets through Parliament, it will update the existing right to request flexible working to encourage more effective dialogue between employers and employees, allow more statutory requests in a year and require that they are administered more speedily. The Government believe that that will benefit employees generally but also those who are working with a life-threatening condition. We look forward to working with the hon. Member for Bolton South East (Yasmin Qureshi) to take that Bill forward.

    The Government are absolutely committed to improving the lives of people with disabilities, terminal illnesses and related conditions. We believe it is imperative that all employers fulfil their obligations to their employees. There is a lot of guidance and support available to them, and the House has heard the considerable package of support the Government have put in place, including through the ACAS website, which I encourage anyone listening to or watching the debate to look at. We encourage all employers to make use of those resources and ensure that employees with terminal illnesses are given the help and support they need to stay in work if that is what they wish to do, which many do.

    Having gone through the Bill carefully with officials in the Department, we now need to go through it with officials in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Department of Health and Social Care. While I am aware that the lead on this is the Small Business Minister, in my Department, I suggest to the hon. Member for Stockton North that we convene a group of key Ministers in the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the DWP and the DHSC, to look at the specific groups who are not able to receive their entitlements—that is the hon. Gentleman’s point: many people have entitlements but are not getting them—and to ensure that good employers who are trying to do the right thing can provide a mixture of private employer support and universal credit support.

    Everyone here today has heard the extensive support the Government are providing, but it is not just a question of announcing lots of pots of money. For the people who are living in this very difficult situation, we must ensure that we make it easy for them to apply for and secure that help. I would happily undertake to request that Ministers in those two Departments and the Small Business Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake) sit down to look in particular at how we can ensure that eligible people get what they are eligible for and how we can promote best practice and make sure that these people who have the tragedy of a terminal illness are able to fulfil their lives properly in the workplace.

    Alex Cunningham

    I just place on record my thanks to the Minister for the constructive way in which he is responding to my speech and my Bill. I hope we will be able to work on it sometime in the future.

    George Freeman

    I am grateful, and in return I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. I look forward to our being able to make some progress, whether or not in the form of this Bill. I think he understands that we need to try to focus on solving the problem, and he probably does not want to wait three years to get his Bill on to the statute book—he would rather get something done more quickly.

    In conclusion, I will sign off where I started, and pay tribute to the work of the Marie Curie team and all the hospices that Members have mentioned around the country, which do so much for this most vulnerable group. I hope that Members across the House can hear how seriously the Government take this matter. We are putting significant funding out there. The real challenge is to make sure that the people on the frontline who are eligible and dealing with the very hardest situation in life can get the help they need.

    On the employment side of the hon. Gentleman’s Bill in particular, everyone can see that there is a problem when people do not have the most enlightened employers. Asking those people to take recourse through the courts when they are in the situation they are in is hard, and we need to sit down and see whether there is something we can do to ensure that happens less and less, and that people suffering from disabilities and terminal illnesses can live and work as they want, with dignity right through to the end of their working lives. I think all of us in the House would support that.

  • Alex Cunningham – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    Alex Cunningham – 2022 Speech on the Terminal Illness Bill

    The speech made by Alex Cunningham, the Labour MP for Stockton North, in the House of Commons on 18 November 2022.

    I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

    May I be the first to congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on achieving a Second Reading for his Bill? Perhaps we could persuade him to organise a masterclass on how to achieve Government support for proposed legislation.

    I am grateful to the Public Bill Office and, in particular, to Anne-Marie Griffiths, for their tremendous support in preparing this Bill and to the Minister who has taken the time to talk to me about what I am proposing today.

    As I begin, I wish to thank the teams at both Marie Curie and the Trades Union Congress for all the vital work that they do in supporting those living with terminal illnesses. I also pay tribute to the many inspiring campaigners who work with these organisations, particularly Jacci Woodcock MBE who founded the TUC’s Dying to Work campaign, which I will talk about when I get to clause 3. I would also like to recognise the work of Mark and Cheryl whom I had the privilege of meeting a couple of months ago when I hosted Marie Curie’s Dying in Poverty parliamentary event. These campaigners and their families have been through one of the most difficult experiences that we can imagine—a terminal diagnosis—and yet they continue to use their voices to advocate to improve support for all people with terminal illnesses. Their work should inspire and humble us all—it certainly does me.

    The first time I promoted a private Member’s Bill, to ban smoking in cars with children present, I am proud to say that the Government eventually implemented the measures, albeit three and a half years later. I am hoping they will make quicker progress this time. As the cost of living crisis deepens, people living with terminal illnesses will be disproportionately impacted. Indeed, they are already facing increasing financial precariousness. Between April and September of this year, almost one in five calls to Marie Curie’s support line were from people affected by terminal illness who were concerned about their finances—an increase of 38% on the same period last year. Therefore, I hope the Government take up the measures in my Bill quickly, and provide those living with terminal illnesses with much-needed additional financial support, without costing the Exchequer a penny.

    Nobody should die in poverty, but, tragically, many of our constituents who should be able to spend the last stage of their lives enjoying the company of the people they love, are instead worrying about their finances, struggling to pay bills and incurring debts that will be passed on to their loved ones when they are gone. In 2021, Marie Curie commissioned Loughborough University to examine the number of people who die in poverty in the UK each year. The findings of the research are stark and horrifying: 90,000 people die in poverty every year in the UK, one in four people who die in working age are in poverty in their last year of life, and two in three working-age parents who die experience poverty in the last five years of life.

    Being diagnosed with a terminal illness can lead to a number of additional costs, including travel to appointments, medication costs and higher energy bills, which I will come on to a little later. These costs all land on the doorstep just as people’s income is reduced, as they may be forced to stop work or at least reduce their working hours. As Marie Curie noted in its briefing ahead of the autumn statement:

    “For many, this ‘double squeeze’ on household finances directly leads to a fall below the poverty line. Working age people living with a terminal illness are a third more likely to be in poverty than other working age people.

    For those who die in working age the risks are even higher. Without the fixed income provided by the State Pension and other lifetime savings to rely on, people who die in working age are more than twice as likely to experience poverty at the end of life as those who die in pension age.

    Working age families with children are particularly vulnerable to falling into poverty when hit by terminal illness. Childcare costs cannot be avoided and the impact of one or both parents leaving the workforce means that these families are more likely than any other group to fall below the poverty line when one parent is terminally ill.”

    These statistics underline the urgent need for additional financial support for those living with a terminal illness, particularly those who are of working age.

    There is a range of possible practical and impactful interventions that Marie Curie has worked up, such as placing elements of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline NG6, “Excess winter deaths and illness and the health risks associated with cold homes”, on a statutory footing and including people with terminal illnesses on the priority services register. That obliges providers to prioritise vulnerable customers for additional support, such as advance notice of planned power cuts or priority support in emergencies. It has also been energetically campaigning to give all dying people access to their state pension, no matter their age; to protect dying people from soaring energy bills, including by extending eligibility for the winter fuel payment; and to support dying parents with childcare costs. I urge the Minister to consider Marie Curie’s proposals that are wider than we are discussing today, and to meet it to discuss the full range of policies it has developed. For my part, the scope of this Bill is much narrower, so I hope she will be able to commit to advancing these limited but important proposals.

    If implemented, my Bill would require utility companies to provide certain financial supports to customers with a terminal illness, and it would strengthen the employment rights of people with a terminal illness. Clauses 1 and 2 will enable people who are terminally ill to access financial support from their energy provider via the warm home discount and the energy company obligation. The measures will amend the eligibility criteria for these schemes in existing legislation, to give energy providers an obligation to provide such forms of support to customers who are thought to be in their last year of life.

    In a 2021 report, “No place like home?”, the all-party parliamentary group for terminal illness concluded that the added costs of heating homes could drive many terminally ill people and their families into poverty and have a negative impact on their physical and mental health and wellbeing. That finding was confirmed by Marie Curie in the 2022 report “Dying in poverty”, which said that the energy bills of terminally ill people could increase significantly after their diagnosis. For example, some terminally ill people may need to heat their homes for longer than before, or to a higher temperature, as a result of their condition, while others will need to power medical equipment in the home, such as ventilators, respirators or monitors. Those higher energy needs can push households affected by terminal illness into fuel poverty.

    The UK’s energy providers are required to make certain forms of support available to customers who may struggle to afford the cost of their bills, or who may be vulnerable and need support. They include the warm home discount—a £140 discount on electricity and gas bills over the winter period—and the energy company obligation, which obliges providers to deliver energy efficiency measures to homes in order to help households cut their heating bills. In some cases, eligibility for these schemes is set nationally: for example, low-income pensioners are automatically eligible for the warm home discount under the “core group” system, while customers in receipt of certain benefits are automatically eligible for support under the energy company obligation’s help to heat group. In other cases, energy providers set their own eligibility criteria—such as those for the warm home discount wider group—which are often based on receipt of certain means-tested benefits or other criteria.

    Terminally ill people, especially those of working age, are not automatically eligible for support via these schemes despite their vulnerability to fuel poverty. They may be eligible to apply for support based on other criteria—for example, disability or receipt of means-tested benefits—but they will not necessarily be successful. Both the warm home discount and the energy company obligation require energy companies to make a limited pot of money available to support customers, and a provider’s criteria do not necessarily prioritise those who are terminally ill for support.

    Legislation places obligations on UK energy providers to make support available to customers via the warm home discount and energy company obligation on the basis of eligibility criteria set out in legislation. Regulation 8(5)(c) of the Warm Home Discount (England and Wales) Regulations 2022 sets out the eligibility criteria for the core group, who are automatically eligible for the payment. At present, people are considered eligible for support under the core group system if they are in receipt of the “guarantee credit” element of pension credit. Article 2 of the Electricity and Gas (Energy Company Obligation) Order 2022 sets out the eligibility criteria under the energy company obligation for the help to heat group, who are eligible for interventions to improve the energy efficiency of their homes to help reduce their bills. At present, people are considered eligible for support under the help to heat group if they are in receipt of certain benefits outlined in schedule 1 to the order.

    My Bill amends each of those items of legislation to introduce a new eligibility criterion based on the Social Security (Special Rules for End of Life) Act 2022, extending automatic eligibility for the warm home discount and energy company obligation to people who are thought to be in the last year of their lives. The Government have already demonstrated some commitment to improving financial support for those with terminal illnesses by amending the legal definition of terminal illness in benefits law to enable anyone who is thought to be in the last year of life to claim certain benefits on a fast-track basis. I welcome that, but I also hope that the Government can take this further step and provide necessary additional support for some of those who will need heating the most this winter as their energy bills climb.

    The third and final clause of my Bill aims to put the demands of the TUC’s Dying to Work campaign on a statutory footing, ensuring that terminal illness is recognised as a protected characteristic, so that an employee with a terminal illness would enjoy a protected period during which they could not be dismissed as a result of their condition. This protection will provide those who have received a terminal diagnosis and are still of working age with the choice of how to spend their final months, and the peace of mind of knowing their job is protected and the future financial security of their family is supported. Losing one’s job following a terminal diagnosis can lead to reduced income, further exacerbating the issues with financial security that I have discussed. Sometimes, it leads to a deeply stressful and upsetting HR procedure, which should not have to be a concern for those in the final stages of their life. If a worker with a terminal illness loses their job, they may also lose any death-in-service payments that they have earned through a lifetime of work but which are payable only to those who die while still in employment.

    Clause 3 provides that employers must take into account an employee’s terminal illness when deciding whether it is a reasonable adjustment to retain in employment those who have terminal illnesses, rather than dismiss them in accordance with a sickness absence policy. This will provide people with a terminal illness who are still of working age and who wish to continue working with additional security at the end of their life, and remove some of the stress and fear that they face. Although in some cases the individual may wish to stop working and spend their remaining time outside of work, some workers decide to continue working as long as they can, either because they need the financial security or because they find that their work can be a helpful distraction from their illness. Those who decide to stay in work should not be having to stress about dismissal or salary reductions after any periods of sickness associated with their illness. The clause ensures that whatever choice a person makes, they can expect the appropriate help and support from their employer, because when a person receives a terminal diagnosis, their job should not be on their list of worries.

    Thanks to the efforts of the TUC, over half a million workers in the UK are already covered by the Dying to Work charter. I hope that today the Government can commit to extending that to all workers. I desperately want these proposals to succeed, and would be more than happy to work with the Minister to amend the Bill if necessary ahead of implementation; I know that Marie Curie and the TUC would be pleased to meet officials in order to help in any way they can, too. I reiterate that these changes will not cost the Exchequer a penny, and the cost to energy companies is also very limited, especially when compared with their huge profits. The change to the warm home discount in clause 1 will not necessarily require additional funds, as all it does is widen the criteria of the core group who automatically receive it to include terminally ill people.

    The cost per person of the energy company obligation will depend heavily on what steps are needed to make that person’s home more energy efficient: for example, they may need a new boiler, insulation or a smart meter, among other things. However, again, I am sure the Minister can recognise that those costs would be extremely modest. While these clauses will not be able to ensure that no one dies in poverty—which is what this House should be striving for—I believe they could have a significant impact on the lives of terminally ill people, particularly those of working age, when they are at their most vulnerable. I hope the Minister will support the Bill’s Second Reading today, and work with me in Committee to make it law.

  • Felicity Buchan – 2022 Speech on the Supported Housing Bill

    Felicity Buchan – 2022 Speech on the Supported Housing Bill

    The speech made by Felicity Buchan, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 18 November 2022.

    I start by warmly congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on his incredibly important Bill reaching Second Reading. I pay tribute to everything he has done to get the Bill to Second Reading and for everything he has done in the sector. It is great to see members of his team in the Gallery, and his wife was also there earlier—it was so great to see her.

    I pay tribute to my predecessors, my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall North (Eddie Hughes) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Andrew Stephenson), who is on the Front Bench with me as the Lord Commissioner of His Majesty’s Treasury. It is great to see him here. I also pay tribute to everyone else who has worked so hard on the Bill, including the Select Committee, Crisis and the councils that worked on our pilot projects.

    I pay tribute to the thoughtful contributions from so many Back Benchers, including the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood), who I know has worked intensively in the sector. On my Benches, we heard from my hon. Friends the Members for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra), for Truro and Falmouth (Cherilyn Mackrory), for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer), for Bosworth (Dr Evans), for Ipswich (Tom Hunt), for Heywood and Middleton (Chris Clarkson), for Penrith and The Border (Dr Hudson) and for Keighley (Robbie Moore), as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North (Ben Everitt), who is on the Select Committee, and my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham and Stamford (Gareth Davies), and that is not to miss out the hon. Member for Croydon Central (Sarah Jones).

    The matter we are here to discuss is one of the utmost seriousness and importance to the Government. I am pleased to confirm that the Government fully support the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Bill, and I look forward to continuing to work together with my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East and Opposition Members to get the Bill through Committee and to get these crucial and necessary measures into law.

    As many hon. Members have said, when done well, supported housing provides a safety net for people who require help to live independently or need help in transitioning to mainstream housing. It is also a crucial factor in reducing rough sleeping and homelessness, and in reducing pressure on health and social care services. It is a better alternative to institutional care and prevents poor outcomes such as homelessness and delays in leaving hospital.

    The many good supported housing providers must not be lumped in with the rogue landlords that I and many hon. Members want out of the sector. But, unfortunately, as we have heard, there are some rogue landlords, and it is completely unacceptable for their abuse of the supported housing system to continue. To them, I say that their time is up.

    Through the Bill and subsequent regulations, we intend to drive out substandard providers. It is intolerable that certain landlords are trying to profit at the expense of vulnerable people. The Government’s priority will always be to protect the welfare of its most vulnerable citizens. We will prevent disreputable landlords from exploiting people who find themselves living in accommodation that is poor and, at times, of dangerous quality and lacking in safety and security. People in supported housing have a right to be treated with decency and respect, to have their needs properly assessed and to receive proper, tailored support. We will ensure that residents of supported housing can be confident in the standard of both their accommodations and their support. Driving up standards is crucial, given the wider repercussions that the worst of the shoddy accommodation can have both on the individuals living there and on surrounding communities.

    As we have heard, neighbourhoods that experience high concentrations of poorly managed supported housing can become a magnet for antisocial behaviour and criminal activity. On Tuesday, I visited Coventry and met senior council officers and councillors. I heard about the wide range of supported housing, from the very good to the unacceptable, and about how they are working to help substandard providers to get up to scratch. Coventry will be one of the recipients of our supported housing investment programme. In Coventry, I also had the opportunity to meet people who had previously experienced homelessness but have benefited from good quality supported housing services, which have helped them to move on with their lives. I was struck by the impact that that has made on an individual level. It underlined the significant difference that this type of housing can make to people’s lives.

    Let us not forget that the financial benefit gained by substandard providers rests on exploitation of the rules on housing benefit, as the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood explained. Ministers at the Department for Work and Pensions agree that it is totally unacceptable for large amounts of public money to be paid out in housing benefit to rogue landlords who are gaming the system and doing little or nothing to support vulnerable residents. We must do all we can to ensure that vulnerable residents get the support that they need and that standards are driven up. We must also ensure that better value for money is delivered for taxpayers.

    A key issue is how we can align measures in the Bill with any changes to housing benefit regulations, to stop those who are gaming the system being able to do so. At the same time, we will ensure that the measures set out in the Bill are implemented and deployed proportionately. It is crucial that we avoid unintended consequences in the sector, and also avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the many good providers out there.

    The Government have already acted to tackle rogue landlords. In October 2020, we published the national statement of expectations, setting out the Government’s vision for the planning, commissioning, and delivering of good quality accommodation in supported housing. In the same month, we launched the supported housing pilots. Between October 2020 and September 2021, we funded five local authorities with a total of £5.4 million to explore ways of improving quality and value for money in the supported housing sector, particularly in exempt accommodation.

    We have continued to build on the success of the pilots. Last week we announced that we are funding 26 local authorities, including the five that took part in the pilots, through a supported housing improvement programme, awarding £20 million to some areas of the country most affected by problems with supported housing. That programme sends a clear message to unscrupulous providers that the Government will not tolerate poor-quality support, the exploitation of vulnerable people, or abuse of the supported housing system. This Government are sending a clear message: time is up for rogue landlords who take money from the taxpayer while exploiting vulnerable people.

    Despite the success of the pilots, and enhancing the ability of other local authorities to begin to tackle this issue, we recognised that more is needed to drive out the unscrupulous profiteers. That is why in March this year we announced our intention to bring in standards for supported housing, including powers for local authorities to manage supported housing in their area, and to seek to make changes to housing benefit regulations.

    Mr Mohindra

    I thank the Minister for the reassurances she has given the House. Does she agree that this may not be a silver bullet, and is she confident that she will continue to keep an eye on this brief, in case there are unintended consequences or, more importantly, other things we may need to do in the future to ensure that this bad behaviour is stamped out?

    Felicity Buchan

    My hon. Friend makes an important point. We must continue to monitor this sector. Enforcement is important, as is consultation. We must get the regulations right because we want to target unscrupulous landlords, not the good providers. We had a written statement at the beginning of the year, and it very fortuitous that my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East chose this issue for his private Member’s Bill. It is an excellent opportunity to take forward the necessary legislation to make this happen, deliver on that commitment, and build on the action that the Government have already taken. Once the measures set out in the Bill are implemented, there will for the first time be a set of national supported housing standards, issued by the Government, and a licensing scheme that local authorities can deploy, so that all residents and providers of supported housing know what good-quality accommodation and support is, giving confidence to residents and landlords alike.

    Helping to oversee the implementation of the Bill will be the supported housing advisory panel, and I welcome this provision. The panel will bring together key players in the sector to advise and work in partnership with the Government. The board will be able to provide challenge, help with direction and hold us to account as we move to deliver the measures in the Bill. As many Members have alluded to, it will also help us to build a body of data and information at local and national level, which I agree is of the utmost import.

    The Bill will require all local authorities in England to put in place supported housing strategies, which will help them to better understand their local supported housing market. The supported housing oversight pilots demonstrated that strategic planning is a valuable tool that enables local authorities to assess the type and stock of provision in their area, estimate the need for supported housing and look to future requirements.

    While strategic planning is an essential tool that will provide greater intelligence and data on supported housing, it will not eradicate the problems with rogue providers. Hard enforcement is required, and that is where the licensing regime suggested in the Bill comes in. My hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East has been clear—and I completely agree—that, where licensing requirements are not met, penalties should apply. I am pleased to see that the powers in the Bill allow us to make provision for that in the licensing regulations.

    The Bill enables regulations to be made so that local authorities will require providers of supported housing to obtain a licence to operate in their area. Providers will need to meet conditions on the adequacy and suitability of accommodation and on the support services set out in national standards, and they will also need to pass a fit and proper person test, which the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood raised.

    The Government believe that action to stop the problems in supported housing needs to be taken as quickly as possible. We will launch a formal consultation on measures in the Bill as quickly as possible following Royal Assent. I commit today at the Dispatch Box to laying regulations for the licensing regime within 18 months of the Bill being passed.

    Providers will need to demonstrate that they are meeting national supported housing standards. Those standards will look at the quality of accommodation and the quality of care, support or supervision that people are receiving. I am pleased to say that my officials have already been working closely with the sector on what those standards might include, but it will be a complex task, and we will consult widely to ensure we get it right and do not place undue burdens on providers that are already providing excellent services to residents.

    Mr Mohindra

    I thank the Minister for that excellent update. After that consultation with the industry, will she commit to share with the relevant local authorities best practice in other parts of the country, so that they do not need to reinvent the wheel?

    Felicity Buchan

    That is a very important point. We will have national standards. We will also have best practice guidelines, so that local authorities throughout the country can adopt those practices.

    How people become residents of supported housing is an important aspect of this work. It is unacceptable that disreputable providers are advertising on Gumtree and Twitter and taking advantage of vulnerable people who are experiencing a crisis in their lives for their own profit. Referral pathways into supported housing are a very important issue and one we will look at as part of the introduction of the Bill.

    We will, of course, be consulting on what national supported housing standards might include and how the licensing regime will work. We will ensure that people living in supported housing have the opportunity to have their views heard, as well as providers of supported housing, local authorities and other stakeholders. I know there is concern in the sector around the types of supported housing scheme that licensing requirements will apply to. To that end, we will be able to make provision for exemptions from the requirement to apply for a licence. The Government will take great care with that and, where we are convinced that other satisfactory oversight arrangements already exist and that the risk of exemptions being exploited is low, we will set out which specific types of housing are exempt.

    Many Members discussed housing benefit. As I said, DWP Ministers are also keen to see an end to this exploitation, and we welcome the fact that the Bill makes it clear that the interaction between licensing and housing benefit regulations will be carefully considered as details of the licensing regime are developed. As with the other licensing requirements, we will consult fully on that.

    Many Government Members talked about the need to improve national data. The Government already have research under way to provide an up-to-date estimate of the size and cost of the supported housing sector across Great Britain, as well as estimates of future demand. In addition, DWP has made changes to the way local authorities provide housing benefit data on supported housing claims, which will ensure that over time we have better data on exempt accommodation, which relates to the point raised by the hon. Member for Croydon Central.

    I want to spend a few minutes talking about the intentionally homeless provision in the Bill. Members will be aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East brought forward the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. That important legislation placed a duty on local authorities to try to prevent and relieve a person’s homelessness. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House will agree that should vulnerable people find themselves in poor quality supported housing, they should not be afraid to challenge their landlord. Where this leads to adverse consequences, people in that position should be able to look to their local authority for help. The Bill also sets out that a person will not be treated as intentionally homeless if they are leaving supported exempt accommodation because of the poor quality of the accommodation or the poor quality of the support, and that the accommodation and support

    “does not meet National Supported Housing Standards.”

    This will ensure that residents feel confident in leaving poor quality supported housing provision and challenging those landlords who are not providing the accommodation and support that we expect.

    Before I conclude, I want to pick up on a few points that were raised by Members. My opposite number, the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook) asked my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East why there were “mays” as opposed to “musts” in the Bill. I just want to address that. I want to be clear that we are required to consult on the regulations. We do need to make a progress report within 12 months. As I have said at the Dispatch Box, I am today making a firm commitment to lay the regulations within 18 months. I believe that the hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich alluded specifically to clause 5 being drafted as “may”, but that is because it deals with the consultation, so we want to allow for flexibility to form the most appropriate regulations.

    The hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood talked about the necessity for a fit and proper person clause. As I have already mentioned, there is one in clause 5(2). I reassure her that the Department for Work and Pensions has committed to defining “care,” “support” and “supervision” to improve the quality of that care, support and supervision, and to ensure that taxpayers get value for money.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge talked about the importance of having a link with integrated care systems. I assure him that my officials are working closely with the Department of Health and Social Care, which will be very much involved in developing the advisory panel and the strategies and regulations we put in place. My hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth also mentioned that, and I see him nodding.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Heywood and Middleton asked about money being made available to local authorities. I reassure him that there will be an assessment under the new burdens doctrine. Local authorities will be compensated if it is determined that they have new burdens. I also reassure him that the licensing regime will be a fee-paying scheme, so its ongoing operation should be self-funding.

    A number of Members talked about the importance of national consistency. As I said, we will have a national standard and there will be guidance. A few Members raised the possibility of a national regulator, and the advisory panel will clearly have it within its remit that it can advise the Secretary of State.

    This is a very important Bill, and it is only too clear that poor-quality supported housing is having a very real and harmful impact on certain vulnerable people in parts of the country. I express my gratitude to the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee for its report and recommendations, to which the Government will formally respond in due course.

    I said at the outset that the Government fully support the Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East, and I repeat our support here. We must work together to drive up standards and to make it clear that time is up for rogue providers who take public money while failing vulnerable people.