UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Jonathan Ashworth – 2022 Speech on the State Pension Triple Lock

    Jonathan Ashworth – 2022 Speech on the State Pension Triple Lock

    The speech made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Labour MP for Leicester South, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

    I beg to move,

    That this House calls on the Government to commit to maintaining the state pension triple lock in financial year 2023-24 as promised in the Conservative and Unionist Party manifesto 2019.

    I hope not to detain the House long, because the proposition before it this afternoon is very simple: we are asking the House to stand firm in instructing the Chancellor and the Prime Minister to honour the triple lock promise and uprate the state pension in line with inflation for the next financial year. The motion should not be controversial; indeed, every Member should be able to endorse it in the Division Lobby this evening.

    The reason we have tabled this motion is that pensioners deserve certainty that the promise of protection offered by inflation-proofing the state pension will be honoured. Let us remind ourselves of the facts. Pensioner poverty is up by 450,000 since 2010. Prices in the shops are up. Energy bills are up. The Office for National Statistics found that between June and September this year 3.5 million pensioners had already been forced to spend less on food and essentials because of the soaring cost of living. Over half of pensioners are cutting back on gas and electricity in their homes, and Age UK has projected that 2.8 million older households are set to be in fuel poverty this winter—1.8 million more than in previous years.

    Alex Cunningham (Stockton North) (Lab)

    Did my right hon. Friend read the reports in The Times that the Government are in fact going to follow our example and to confirm that they will increase the state pension in line with inflation? Does he agree that the Minister could intervene now and save us several hours debating these issues by just confirming that the Government do in fact intend to do that?

    Jonathan Ashworth

    I have read not only The Times but the 2019 Conservative manifesto, which committed Conservative Members to maintaining the triple lock, so I look forward to their joining us in the Division Lobby this evening—[Interruption.] I look forward to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Gary Sambrook) joining us in the Division Lobby.

    Gary Sambrook (Birmingham, Northfield) (Con)

    Did the Institute for Fiscal Studies not say that the 2019 Labour party manifesto would benefit high earners rather than low earners on pensions, so is the biggest threat to UK pensioners not the Labour party?

    Jonathan Ashworth

    On the topic of manifestos, the new Prime Minister tells us that we do not need a general election because the 2019 manifesto gives the Conservative party a mandate. If that is the case, Conservative Members should not break their promise on the triple lock, and the hon. Member should join us in the Lobby this afternoon. Indeed, those in his marginal constituency will be watching carefully to see which way he votes later.

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

    I am delighted that the right hon. Gentleman, who by the way—and I do not want to lower his reputation on his own Benches—is a friend of mine, has given way. He knows very well that today is not about a lasting decision by Government but about political theatre. When we vote this afternoon, we will not be voting for what happens in practice; we will be voting because Labour has chosen to try to make political capital out of a difficult issue. I simply say to him that if the Government were to propose breaking that promise, they would not have my support, and they know that, by the way. I would stand by the triple lock. But will the right hon. Gentleman just answer this: was he not the adviser to the former Labour Chancellor Gordon Brown, who awarded pensioners a 50p increase?

    Jonathan Ashworth

    On the latter point, the right hon. Gentleman will recall that the state pension rose by over 50% under the last Labour Government and has risen by around 40% under this Government. I do not want to make an enemy of the right hon. Gentleman, because I know that he agrees with me; I read his comments in the Daily Express yesterday. Indeed, I suspect that he will agree with probably 90% of my speech—so much so that I was tempted to email it to him in advance of this debate, but I did not want to be removed from the Front Bench.

    Let me make a bit of progress. The real-world impact in our constituencies of cutting the state pension again means more and more pensioners turning to food banks and more pensioners shivering under blankets in cold, damp homes, putting themselves at risk of hypothermia. It means more pensioners cutting back, at a time when they have already had to swallow a real-terms cut in the state pension of around £480. Breaking the promise on inflation uprating for next year amounts to a further real-terms cut in the value of the full state pension of £440. We are talking about a £900 cut, around £37 a month in the fixed incomes of Britain’s retirees; a cut in the fixed incomes of groups of the population who cannot easily earn a wage; a cut in fixed income when one in three relies solely on the state pension; and a cut that is punishing at the best of times, but is more devastating when prices are rising and energy bills are increasing.

    Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)

    Does the shadow Minister agree that we are talking not only about a cut, but about the uncertainty that the Government have created over the weeks, with their U-turns upon U-turns? Pensioners do not know whether to trust this Government and they have no certainty, even despite what has been reported this morning.

    Jonathan Ashworth

    We have had continued mixed messaging from the Government, which is why today is an opportunity for Conservative Members to send a clear message to their constituents about their position on the triple lock.

    Kim Leadbeater (Batley and Spen) (Lab)

    Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a broader point here? A couple in their 70s in my constituency have contacted me to say that they are concerned about their pensions for themselves, but that they also care for members of their extended family who have physical ailments, autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. As the costs of that care are increasing, the impact of reducing their pensions becomes a massive factor. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the Government abandon their triple lock promise and inflict this real-terms pensions cut, that will have a knock-on effect on some of the most vulnerable people in our society?

    Jonathan Ashworth

    My hon. Friend has described with great eloquence the real-life impact that this cut will have on our constituents. Although I do not know the particular circumstances of the family she refers to, they may well be reliant on other social security payments, and we have no clarity from the Government about whether they will also be cut in real terms.

    Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)

    Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that those other social security payments also need to be uprated in line with inflation? If so, should Labour not have made the motion wider to include that?

    Jonathan Ashworth

    Today’s debate is about the triple lock, but we do agree that payments such as universal credit should be uprated in line with inflation and not suffer a real-terms cut.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP) rose—

    Jonathan Ashworth

    I give way to my fellow Leicester City fan.

    Jim Shannon

    We are on a roll: three games we have won in a row.

    Some people believe that retired people live a wonderful life, but the reality is often much bleaker: less heat, less food and making the most out of a meagre income. Does the shadow Minister agree that the Government must honour those who have paid tax and national insurance contributions over their lifetimes? Now is the time to support them, when they need us.

    Jonathan Ashworth

    My friend and fellow Leicester City fan makes his point with the same force and precision as Youri Tielemans putting one in the back of the net against Everton at the weekend. He is absolutely right.

    Let me make a bit of progress. A cut in the pension will also disproportionately hit retired women, who rely on the state pension and other benefits such as pension credits for more than 60% of their income. This £900 cut in income is for those who have worked hard all their lives, who have paid their dues and who, as my mum would say, have paid their stamps.

    Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab) rose—

    David Johnston (Wantage) (Con) rose—

    Jonathan Ashworth

    I will give way to my hon. Friend from Leicester, given that I am a Leicester MP, and then let the hon. Gentleman in.

    Liz Kendall

    I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. I am sure he knows that half of all Leicester pensioners live in the most deprived 20% of the country, and one in five live in the most deprived 5% of the country. They are frightened for their future and will feel betrayed by Conservative Members if they do not walk through the Lobby with us tonight.

    Jonathan Ashworth

    My hon. Friend is absolutely spot on, as she always is. May I also say what a pleasure it is to see her back defending the people of Leicester West after her maternity leave.

    David Johnston

    Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that, given that the Government are making their announcement about the triple lock next week and that it takes effect in April, it is therefore irresponsible to suggest that pensioners will face the sort of cuts that he is talking about? We should just wait for the announcement.

    Jonathan Ashworth

    I do not know if the hon. Gentleman was in the House about three weeks ago, but that was when the then Conservative Prime Minister committed from the Dispatch Box to maintain the triple lock. If the hon. Gentleman wants to stand up for the 21,000 pensioners in the Wantage area who are set to lose £425 from a real-terms cut, he should vote with us in the Lobby this afternoon.

    Let me make a bit of progress. A £900 cut in income, around £37 per month, is punishing at the best of times, and it is a cut for people who feel they have paid their dues—people who, like my mum, feel they have paid their stamps. It is a cut for those who have worked all their lives and who often live now with a disability or in ill health because of their hard work. Whether because of the hard, unyielding occupations that they may have worked in, they might live with chapped hands, sore backs and sore knees. They deserve a retirement of security, dignity and respect. It would be a betrayal of Britain’s almost 13 million pensioners to cut the pension a second year in a row, and this House should not stand for it.

    Why has the triple lock been in the Chancellor’s crosshairs? It is because Conservative Members presented, cheered and welcomed the most disastrous Budget in living memory. It was a Budget so reckless and so cavalier with the public finances that it crashed the economy with unfunded tax cuts, sent borrowing costs soaring, gave us a run on pension funds, and forced mortgage rates to ricochet round the money markets, costing homeowners hundreds of pounds extra a month, and now they want us all to think it was just an aberration—that it was all just a bad dream; that Bobby Ewing was in the shower all along. But for the British people it remains a real nightmare, and now the Government are expecting pensioners to pay the price. Well, we will not stop reminding them of the Budget that they imposed on the British people.

    In recent days, ahead of this debate, I have been inundated with messages from Britain’s retirees saying that that price is far too high. This was what Hilda wrote:

    “We believed that with the triple lock in place, our state pension would keep pace with wages and inflation…This government cynically dismantled the triple lock and threw state pensioners under the bus”.

    This was what Mary wrote to me:

    “I am in tears of frustration and anger…Not all pensioners are well off. I for one am really struggling”.

    This was from Patrick, who is aged 73:

    “How can a responsible government minister welch on a promise?”

    That is the crux of the matter, because every Government Member stood on a manifesto in 2019 that made a clear promise to the triple lock.

    Six months ago, the Prime Minister, when he was the Chancellor, told us from that Dispatch Box that the promise of inflation-proofing the state pension would be honoured for the next financial year:

    “I can reassure the House that next year…benefits will be uprated by this September’s consumer prices index”.

    He went on:

    “the triple lock will apply to the state pension.”—[Official Report, 26 May 2022; Vol. 715, c. 452.]

    Those were the Prime Minister’s words six months ago. He tells us that we should not have a general election because that 2019 manifesto gives him a mandate, but he will not give us a straight answer to a very simple question: will he honour the promise he made from the Dispatch Box six months ago? So much for his promise to restore “integrity and professionalism” to Downing Street.

    A year ago, the House debated breaking the triple lock. The then Pensions Minister, now promoted to Minister for Employment as Minister of State—I congratulate him of course, and I am pleased that he is back in the Department after a brief period away—last year justified cutting the state pension, telling us it was only for one year. Just a year ago, on 15 November 2021, he said:

    “The triple lock will, I confirm, be applied in the usual way for the rest of the Parliament.”—[Official Report, 15 November 2021; Vol. 703, c. 372.]

    So what has changed?

    Anthony Browne (South Cambridgeshire) (Con)

    I repeat that this is political theatre and, for those in doubt, whatever the vote is today, it will have absolutely no impact on the legislation whatever. I just want to know if the right hon. Member is aware of the very good House of Commons briefing on the triple lock, which compares the basic state pension with average earnings over the last 30 years. The low point of it was between 2000 and 2008, when it went down to 16%. That is the lowest the basic state pension has ever been compared with average earnings, and who was in power at that time? It was the last Labour Government. In fact, the previous Conservative Government and successive Conservative Governments have been more generous on the basic state pension compared with average earnings than the last Labour Government.

    Jonathan Ashworth

    If we want to go down memory lane, a previous Conservative Government broke the earnings link and that is why we need to keep the triple lock, so it builds up its value. The reason those inflation upratings were so low is that we had inflation under control under that Labour Government; we had not lost control of it. We introduced the minimum income guarantee, which the Conservative party voted against, and we introduced pension credit, which the Conservative party opposed at the time, in order to improve the incomes of the poorest pensioners. We brought pensioner poverty down and it is increasing again under this Tory Government.

    As I have said, the then Pensions Minister said that the triple lock would

    “be applied…for the rest of the Parliament”.

    I was sceptical about that. We have these debates across the Dispatch Box and he will recall my scepticism. He is always very noisy on the Front Bench and, when I was asking questions, he was shouting at me and said, “No, we’ve committed to the triple lock. You shouldn’t have to worry.” I asked the then Work and Pensions Secretary, the right hon. Member for Suffolk Coastal (Dr Coffey), and she told me at the time:

    “I am again happy to put on record that the triple lock will be honoured in the future.”—[Official Report, 21 March 2022; Vol. 711, c. 99.]

    That was in March 2022 from that Dispatch Box, yet here we are with the prospect of another real-terms cut in the pension on the table again. Breaking such a promise two years in a row in a cost of living crisis is surely unacceptable.

    That brings me to the new Work and Pensions Secretary, who of course prior to his elevation just a month ago, when real-terms cuts to the pension and other benefits were raised, led the charge at the Tory party conference. He undermined the position of the then Prime Minister and the then Chancellor, telling Sky News it was

    “one of those areas where the Government is going to have to think again.”

    But of course this morning, he did not repeat his line that the Government should think again, because now he is saying we have to wait until next week’s emergency Budget. So we have a U-turn on the U-turn. In fact, the Conservative Twitter account is still saying:

    “We will protect the Triple Lock”.

    The Conservative Twitter account is still repeating what the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for South West Norfolk (Elizabeth Truss), told us from the Dispatch Box three or four weeks ago. So it is a U-turn on a U-turn on a U-turn, and it makes us all dizzy just watching it.

    After all this Conservative party triple lock hokey-cokey, today is a clear opportunity for Conservative Members to finally tell us where they stand. Today is an opportunity for Conservative Members to finally end the uncertainty, finally end the mixed messages and finally end the worry for millions of pensioners who have seen their state pension cut while their cost of living soars, and confirm that the pension will not be cut next year. The uprating of the state pension is crucial to millions of today’s pensioners, but it is also about protecting the incomes of tomorrow’s pensioners. It is about ensuring that the state pension recovers its value relative to wages. Given the move away from final salary schemes, it means certainty for tomorrow’s pensioners as well.

    In the name of today’s pensioners and tomorrow’s pensioners, Conservative MPs should offer us certainty. Our retired constituents have worked hard all their lives, contributed to national insurance and served our communities. They deserve security and dignity. As the former Conservative Pensions Minister Baroness Altmann warned this week:

    “Short-changing pensioners during a cost of living crisis should be unthinkable…Snatching protection away this year could be the biggest betrayal pensioners have ever known.”

    I could not put it better myself. Ministers should stop dithering. They should reject the cut in the state pension and support our motion in the Lobby tonight.

  • George Howarth – 2022 Speech on Employee Share Ownership

    George Howarth – 2022 Speech on Employee Share Ownership

    The speech made by George Howarth, the Labour MP for Knowsley, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision for a new employee share ownership scheme allowing preferential access for lower income workers; to reduce the Share Incentive Plan holding period from five to three years; to require companies to include declarations in annual reports about the type of employee share ownership plans that are operated and the level of employee take up; and for connected purposes.

    This Bill has broad support across the House, as the list of sponsors will demonstrate. Politically, it fits neatly with most ideological traditions. From a Conservative viewpoint, it chimes with the ambition for the UK to become a property-owning, share-owning democracy. From Labour’s perspective, it resonates with the historical commitment to co-operation, although by different means from the traditional par value model, and it provides a means by which the relationship between capital and labour can be modestly realigned.

    As I will demonstrate, the Bill has the support of nationalists and Unionists and Liberal Democrats, who see the benefits to employers and employees as being consistent with their respective political outlooks. Employee share ownership has been supported by a diverse range of organisations, including the CBI, the Social Market Foundation, the TUC and the Co-operative party. The CBI, for example, has stated:

    “The moral case for financial inclusion is a compelling one—people have a right to their dignity and financial exclusion denies them that right.”

    Similarly, the Social Market Foundation pointed out:

    “As the UK economy emerges from the Coronavirus pandemic, now is a good time for government to push for higher rates of employee share ownership.”

    The TUC has said that, subject to certain conditions—for example, a preference for collective schemes and them not being used as a substitute for collective bargaining and trade union involvement—it supports employee share ownership.

    This Bill aims to update two of the current share ownership schemes—the share incentive plan, known as SIP, and the save-as-you-earn system, known as SAYE or Sharesave—and proposes a third scheme. The reason the two existing schemes need to be updated is that, over recent years, the number of such plans has been plateauing and, in some cases, falling. The Treasury’s own data acknowledge that trend. The number of firms that granted a new SAYE option in 2021 was 260, a fall from 340 in 2007. Overall, employees were awarded or purchased shares in 400 companies, compared with 570 in 2011-12.

    There are several reasons for that decline. First, SIP and SAYE were introduced 22 and 42 years ago respectively. In the intervening years, employment practices have undergone significant changes, and the schemes no longer reflect those changes. For example, the length of time an employee spends at a company has markedly reduced. Indeed, young people are often encouraged to move jobs more frequently to secure career advancement. The Social Market Foundation has said:

    “Among the poorest half of people aged 25 to 34, typical net financial wealth among those who are not employee shareholders was just £77. But among employee shareholders, wealth stood at £750.”

    That being the case, the five-year minimum investment commitment for SIP schemes, to ensure maximum tax efficiency, is no longer realistic.

    The fact that the Government offer tax advantages to employee share ownership is, of course, welcome. The risk, however, is that without updating them, they could become increasingly obsolete. For that reason, the Bill would reduce the commitment from five years to three, to achieve maximum tax efficiency, as advocated by ProShare, the industry representative body. Moreover, many employers believe that such a change would make them more likely to offer SIP schemes.

    Another problem is that current plans apply only to those on pay-as-you-earn. There are now, however, some 4 million people who work in the so-called gig economy. A further provision in the Bill would create a new plan that does not depend on regular monthly contributions and is accessible to those in less regular forms of work. It would enable employers to give a free share award to their employees, to be held for a year, after which it could be realised at a discount value, as in SAYE schemes currently. That would be attractive to younger staff, who may not envisage staying at a company for three years, let alone five.

    The other provision in the Bill is to require the Treasury to carry out a consultation with all the relevant bodies, including those I have referred to, with the aim of modernising employee share ownership to reflect the changes that have taken place since the existing schemes were introduced. One new idea that could be consulted on is allowing employees to access the holding built up in their share incentive plan in a tax-efficient and advantageous manner that, under the current scheme, is only available after five years, with regular contributions made over the last one year, without a penalty being applied.

    Before concluding, I would like to say a few words about the benefits that such schemes bring to employees and employers. Two examples illustrate the benefits to employees. First, Pets at Home staff—mainly shop floor staff working in retail—who participated in the company’s SAYE scheme have made an average gain of £21,000. That is a healthy return on their investment and an increase in their financial resilience. Secondly, as ProShare’s annual survey shows, the average value of a participant’s shareholding at the end of 2021 was £10,295—again, a significant sum.

    Employers gain too. As the CBI and the Social Market Foundation pointed out, employees having a stake in the company they work for provides important productivity gains, as well as boosting innovation and corporate long-termism. I hope this Bill will be a good starting point in encouraging and expanding employee share ownership and enabling the potential benefits to all concerned to be realised.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Ordered,

    That Sir George Howarth, Margaret Beckett, Kirsty Blackman, Sir Graham Brady, Philip Davies, Mr Jonathan Djanogly, Dame Margaret Hodge, John McDonnell, Esther McVey, Sarah Olney, Jim Shannon and Gareth Thomas present the Bill.

    Sir George Howarth accordingly presented the Bill.

  • Julia Lopez – 2022 Speech on Cyber Essentials

    Julia Lopez – 2022 Speech on Cyber Essentials

    The speech made by Julia Lopez, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sports, at DCMS in London on 7 November 2022.

    Introduction

    Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for joining us at this Cyber Essentials showcase event. I’m very excited to be here today, and it is great to see so many people here from a range of organisations including large and small businesses, government departments, trade bodies and charities. I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to attend and celebrate this fantastic event with all of us here at DCMS.

    It has been great to hear about the Cyber Essentials journey from Chris [Pinder, IASME] and Lindy [Cameron, CEO, National Cyber Security Centre], and some of the noteworthy milestones of the scheme over the past 8 years. It is amazing to be able to say that the 100,000th certificate was awarded a few months ago, and I know that many of you here today are Cyber Essentials certified and are counted in that number.

    The UK government is working to make the UK the safest place to live and work online. DCMS plays a critical role in strengthening the UK’s cyber ecosystem and building a resilient and thriving digital UK, in line with our £2.6 billion National Cyber Strategy. As part of that strategy, we are committed to increasing the uptake of standards such as Cyber Essentials. To date, Cyber Essentials has had a profound impact in driving improved cyber security across a wide range of organisations. It is becoming increasingly embedded within our economy and it is playing a vital role in driving a more resilient and prosperous UK.

    We regularly hear from organisations that are benefitting from the scheme – from large blue chip companies to small organisations and local charities, helping the most vulnerable in society – a small managed service provider in Northern Ireland, a nursing home in Liverpool, a domestic abuse charity in the Midlands and a charity supporting those with visual or hearing loss in Scotland – are just a few organisations that have gone through the Cyber Essentials scheme recently.

    We have heard a lot about growth today, not just of the Cyber Essentials scheme itself but of the entire ecosystem that surrounds it. It is also helping improve all organisations’ productivity and growth as they securely embrace digital technologies. The government’s vision is for this growth to continue, especially in the face of economic adversity. We want to raise awareness of the scheme, to see an exponential increase in the number of Cyber Essentials certifications and to raise the baseline of cyber resilience across the economy. We want all organisations in the UK to be working towards Cyber Essentials. To do this, we need organisations to be asking their suppliers, partners and other third parties they engage with to have it. Most suppliers to government need to have Cyber Essentials and we believe that organisations across the wider economy should be asking their own suppliers to do likewise and that is our ask of you today – to promote and use Cyber Essentials as a key tool when assessing the security of your suppliers.

    Supply chains

    I know a lot of you are grappling with cyber security challenges in your supply chains. Worrying incidents have shown us that exploiting supply chain vulnerabilities can have severe, far reaching consequences. In the supply chain call for views we published last year, 46% of organisations said a lack of tools is a severe barrier to managing their supplier risk.

    I believe Cyber Essentials has an important role to play here. It is not a silver bullet and does not guarantee organisations won’t  fall victim to a cyber attack, but it does provide protection and resilience for so many. In our engagements with industry, including many of you, we are seeing an increasing number of organisations use Cyber Essentials as a tool to assure themselves that third parties, including suppliers, have implemented minimum cyber security controls.

    For example, the NHS recently introduced a requirement for IT suppliers to have Cyber Essentials, thus raising the bar for those organisations that wish to do business with the NHS.  Other organisations have seen reduced costs and increased efficiency in their due diligence processes by requiring suppliers to have Cyber Essentials. A well known property website recently told us that asking for Cyber Essentials from suppliers has reduced their due diligence process from days to hours. For them, Cyber Essentials has a commercial benefit and is saving them money.

    In a similar vein, we are delighted to announce that DCMS is now working in partnership with St James’s Place, a large financial services firm, who have recently required all of their partners to become Cyber Essentials Plus certified. We will hear more from them in our panel discussion in just a few minutes, but this is a great example of an organisation proactively driving improved security practices in those organisations they work so closely with.

    Cyber Essentials Pathways

    Now, it would be remiss of me to not recognise the fact that for some organisations, especially those with large and complex IT infrastructures, it is a struggle to comply with all aspects of Cyber Essentials. As Lindy mentioned, we are looking forward to seeing the results of the Cyber Essentials Pathways pilot and anticipate this will provide a further opportunity for organisations to attain Cyber Essentials. We want to ensure that being Cyber Essentials certified is accessible for all organisations. To this end, we are also in the process of launching an evaluation of the scheme, to help us identify and address any barriers that organisations face when going through the Cyber Essentials process.

    Conclusion

    On that note, I wanted to close by saying that my officials and I would love to hear from you, to better understand how DCMS and industry can work together to ensure Cyber Essentials is an effective certification scheme. I invite you to collaborate with us, to join us on the journey to improve Cyber Essentials and ensure it continues to raise the baseline level of cyber security across our supply chains.

    The new government remains intent on improving cyber security across our economy. Our Product Security and Telecoms Infrastructure Bill is close to completing its passage through Parliament and when it becomes law, this will ensure much better security in consumer IoT products. We are also working to improve our cyber resilience legislation and expand the number of skilled people working in cyber security. We’re continuing to build our digital identity framework, which will help the public and businesses verify identities in an easy, secure and trustworthy manner.

    Together we can reduce the social and economic harm that we continue to see from cyber security attacks and drive a more resilient and prosperous UK. Thank you once again for working with us on this amazing scheme.

  • Chris Heaton-Harris – 2022 Statement on Formation of the Northern Ireland Executive

    Chris Heaton-Harris – 2022 Statement on Formation of the Northern Ireland Executive

    The statement made by Chris Heaton-Harris, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker, with permission I would like to make a statement on the issues arising from the failure of the devolved government of Northern Ireland – the Northern Ireland Executive – to form.

    Mr Deputy Speaker, the overriding priority of this Government is to implement, maintain and protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement.

    Northern Ireland is governed best when governed locally.

    Since May, that has not been possible. But our commitment remains absolutely clear: this Government believes that this is the moment for the restoration of the devolved institutions and will work to that end as a matter of the utmost priority.

    My predecessors have all referred to critical times for Northern Ireland. And there have been many. But this year is indeed a critical one.

    Mr Deputy Speaker, I can see you are thinking that you might have heard that last section of my statement before. And that’s because you have – those words were spoken by a former Secretary of State, the former Member for Neath, at this dispatch box back in 2006.

    And whilst these times are different with different issues affecting Northern Ireland, I and this Government believe strongly that people in Northern Ireland deserve a functioning Assembly and Executive, where locally elected representatives can address issues that matter most to the people that elect them.

    That is why, back in May, people cast their votes in Northern Ireland – to give their communities a voice in Stormont.

    However, for six months the Parties have not come together and, on the 28th October, the deadline to form an Executive, set down in law passed. That was the Northern Ireland Ministers, Elections and Petitions of Concern Act 2022. This is hugely disappointing.

    As a result, Mr Speaker, I am bound by law to call new elections for the Northern Ireland Assembly, as set out in the New Decade, New Approach agreement, that have to take place within 12 weeks of the 28th October.

    Since 28th October I have been engaging widely in Northern Ireland, with the Parties, businesses, community representatives and members of the public. And I’ve also  spoken with other international interlocutors.

    I think it would be fair to say, Mr Speaker, that the vast majority of those I have spoken to think that an election at this time would be most unwelcome.

    What people would welcome is having their devolved institutions up and running – because they are worried when they see a massive £660m black hole in this year’s public finances at the same time as their public services are deteriorating.

    They are worried that almost 187,000 people in Northern Ireland have been waiting for over a year for their first outpatient appointment.

    And they are worried that there is a higher share of working age adults in Northern Ireland with no formal qualifications than anywhere else in the United Kingdom.

    There is also, Mr Speaker, a legitimate and deep concern about the functioning of the Northern Ireland Protocol. This is felt across Northern Ireland and very strongly indeed in the Unionist community.

    The one thing that everyone agrees on is that we must try and find a way through this current impasse – where I have a legal duty to call an election that few want and everyone tells me will change nothing.

    Thus, I will be introducing legislation to provide a short, straightforward extension to the period for Executive formation – extending the current period by 6 weeks to 8th December, with the potential of a further six week extension to 19th January if necessary.

    This aims to create the time and space needed for talks between the UK Government and the EU Commission to develop and for the Northern Ireland Parties to work together to restore the devolved institutions as soon as possible.

    As I stand here, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Northern Ireland Executive has no Ministers in post.

    This means no Ministers to make choices that deliver the public services people rely on; to react to the budgetary pressures facing schools, hospitals and other key services; to deliver the energy support payments that have been made available by this Government to people across the rest of the United Kingdom.

    Before leaving his post, the Northern Ireland Finance Minister highlighted a £660 million in-year budget black hole, but there are no longer Ministers in the Executive to address this.

    As civil servants do not have the legal authority to tackle these issues in the absence of an Executive, I must take limited but necessary steps to protect Northern Ireland’s public finances and the delivery of public services.

    So, as has been done before, the legislation I introduce will also enable Northern Ireland Departments to support public service delivery; make a small number of vital public appointments, like to the Northern Ireland Policing Board; and address the serious budgetary concerns I’ve already mentioned.

    And, when so many are concerned about the cost of living in Northern Ireland, I know the public there will welcome a further measure I intend to address – another matter addressed by the former Secretary of State who I quoted earlier.

    People across Northern Ireland are frustrated that their Members of the Legislative Assembly continue to draw a full salary whilst not performing all of the duties they were elected to do. I will thus be asking for this House’s support to enable me to reduce MLAs’ salaries appropriately.

    Mr Speaker, let me end by repeating that the overriding priority of this Government is to implement, maintain and protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement.

    This has been the bedrock of so much of the progress in Northern Ireland over the last quarter century.

    There are some, Mr Speaker, who have called for “joint authority” of Northern Ireland in recent days and let me just say: this will not be considered. The UK Government is absolutely clear that the consent principle governs the constitutional position of Northern Ireland, under which Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom. We will not support any arrangements that are inconsistent with that principle. In addition, we remain fully committed to the long established three stranded approach to Northern Ireland Affairs.

    As we approach the 25th Anniversary of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement, I’ve found myself reflecting on the fact that political progress in Northern Ireland has so often required courage, understanding and compromise.

    I hope the measures I have announced in my statement today allow some extra time for these qualities to be displayed once again, and I commend it to the House.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2022 Statement to the House of Commons on COP27

    Rishi Sunak – 2022 Statement to the House of Commons on COP27

    The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on COP27 which I attended in Sharm El Sheikh on Monday.

    When the UK took on the UK Presidency of COP just one third of the global economy was committed to net zero.

    Today that figure is 90 percent.

    And the reduction in global emissions pledged during our Presidency is now equivalent to the entire annual emissions of America.

    There is still a long way to go to limit global temperature rises to 1.5 degrees.

    But the historic Glasgow Climate Pact kept that goal within reach.

    And the whole House, I know, will want to join me in paying tribute to My Rt Hon Friend the Member for Reading West for his inspirational leadership as COP President.

    The question at this Summit, Mr Speaker, was whether countries would deliver on their promises.

    I’m pleased to say that our nation will.

    We have already cut our carbon emissions faster than anyone else in the G7.

    And we will fulfil our ambitious commitment to reduce emissions by at least 68 per cent by the end of the decade.

    Now, I know that some have feared Putin’s abhorrent war in Ukraine could distract from global efforts from tackling climate change.

    But I believe it should catalyse them.

    Climate security and energy security go hand in hand.

    Putin’s contemptible manipulation of energy prices has only reinforced the importance of ending our dependence on fossil fuels.

    So we will make this country a clean energy superpower.

    We will accelerate our transition to renewables which have already grown four-fold as a proportion of our electricity supply over the last decade.

    We will invest in building new nuclear power stations for the first time since the 1990s.

    And by committing £30 billion to support our green industrial revolution we will leverage up to £100 billion of private investment to support almost half a million high wage, high skilled green jobs.

    Mr Speaker, there is also no solution to climate change without protecting and restoring nature.

    So at COP27, the UK committed £90 million to the Congo Basin as part of £1.5 billion we are investing in protecting the world’s forests.

    And I co-hosted the first meeting of our Forests and Climate Leaders’ partnership which will deliver on the historic commitment to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030.

    Now, central to all our efforts, is keeping our promises on climate finance.

    So the UK is delivering on our commitment of £11.6 billion.

    And to support the most vulnerable who are experiencing the worst impacts of climate change we will triple our funding on adaptation to reach £1.5 billion a year in 2025.

    In Glasgow, the UK pioneered a new global approach using aid funding to unlock billions of pounds of private finance for new green infrastructure.

    So I was delighted to join President Ramaphosa to mark the publication of his investment plan which delivers on this new model.

    South Africa will benefit from cheaper, cleaner power cutting emissions while simultaneously creating new green jobs for his people.

    And we will look to support other international partners in taking a similar approach.

    We also made further commitments to support clean power in developing countries.

    This included investing a further £65 million in commercialising innovative clean technologies and working with the private sector to deliver a raft of green investment projects in Kenya.

    Now Mr Speaker, the Summit allowed me to meet many of my counterparts for the first time.

    With the Egyptian President, I raised the case of the British-Egyptian citizen Alaa Abd el-Fattah.

    And I know the whole House will share my deep concern about his case, which grows more urgent by the day.

    And we will continue to press the Egyptian government to resolve the situation.

    We want to see Alaa freed and reunited with his family as soon as possible.

    With President Macron, we discussed our shared determination to crack down on criminal smuggling gangs.

    And I also discussed illegal migration with other European leaders too.

    We are all facing the same shared challenge – and we agreed to solve it together.

    And finally, I had good first meetings with the new Prime Minister of Italy, the German Chancellor, the President of the EU, the President of Israel, and the leaders of UAE, Kenya and Norway, as well as the UN Secretary General.

    In all of these discussions, the UK is acting with our friends to stand up for our values around the world and to deliver stability and security at home.

    Tackling climate change and securing our energy independence is central to these objectives.

    So even though we may now have handed over the Presidency of COP, the United Kingdom will proudly continue to lead the global effort to deliver net zero.

    Because this is the way to ensure the security and prosperity of our country for today and for generations to come.

    And I commend this statement to the House.

  • John Whittingdale – 2022 Question on Government Funding for the BBC World Service

    John Whittingdale – 2022 Question on Government Funding for the BBC World Service

    The question made by Sir John Whittingdale, the Conservative MP for Maldon, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

    What funding his Department provides to the BBC World Service.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)

    The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is providing the BBC World Service with a flat cash three-year settlement of £94.4 million annually. Since 2016, the FCDO has provided over £468 million to the World Service via the World2020 programme, funding 12 language services and enhancements to BBC Arabic, Russian and English.

    Sir John Whittingdale

    Does my hon. Friend agree that the BBC World Service plays an ever more important role in countering disinformation, particularly from Russia and elsewhere? Will he therefore look to increase the amount of support that his Department gives to the World Service, and does he share my concern that the BBC is proposing to reduce funding by £28 million with the loss of 10 radio services?

    David Rutley

    I recognise my right hon. Friend’s long-standing interest in this issue. The FCDO greatly values the World Service’s role in countering disinformation, particularly President Putin’s harmful narratives, and it has provided an additional £1.44 million this year to support this work on top of our annual £94 million funding. The changes reflect the BBC’s ambition to become a digital-first organisation and, as a result, audiences will still retain access to all 42 language services.

  • David Rutley – 2022 Statement on British Embassy in Israel Relocation to Jerusalem

    David Rutley – 2022 Statement on British Embassy in Israel Relocation to Jerusalem

    The statement made by David Rutley, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

    There are no plans to move the UK embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv. Israel is a close friend and a key strategic partner, built on decades of co-operation. We will continue to strengthen our relationship with Israel through our embassy in Tel Aviv.

  • Hertfordshire Police – 2022 Statement on Arrest of a Journalist

    Hertfordshire Police – 2022 Statement on Arrest of a Journalist

    The statement made by Hertfordshire Police on 8 November 2022 after the arrest of a journalist.

    As always, our priority remains to ensure public safety – we have a responsibility for the health and safety of all those involved and everyone at the scene, including emergency services, members of the public, members of the press and the protestors themselves.

    These operations are very fluid and fast moving, with the potential to cause widespread and sustained disruption, that not only affects Hertfordshire’s stretch of the M25 but also the wider road networks.

    Our officers have been instructed to act as quickly as they can, using their professional judgement, to clear any possible protestors in order to get roads up and running and to prevent anyone from coming to harm.

    Seven people were arrested yesterday. Of these seven, two were subsequently charged and two were released on police bail with conditions. Three of them were released with no further action following extensive enquiries.

    Though as a matter of course we do not comment on the circumstances surrounding individual arrests, these circumstances did give us grounds to hold them in custody for questioning in order to verify their credentials and progress our investigation.

  • Michelle Donelan – 2022 Speech at the Rugby League World Cup Number 10 Reception

    Michelle Donelan – 2022 Speech at the Rugby League World Cup Number 10 Reception

    The speech made by Michelle Donelan, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 8 November 2022.

    Hi everyone, thank you very much for having me here. I want to start by saying a huge thank you to the Elmbridge Eagles for their amazing display. I don’t think anything like this has happened before in No10, and I’m sure you can all go home knowing you’ve smashed some records.

    We’ve had such a great year of major sporting events in this country – first with the Women’s EUROs, then the Birmingham Commonwealth Games, and also the World Gymnastics Championships in Liverpool.

    But as a proud northerner who grew up just down the road from the Warrington Wolves, I’m particularly pleased to see the Rugby League World Cup rounding off that list.

    I was lucky enough to get to a game on Saturday – England’s women vs Canada. Sadly they can’t be here today because they’re preparing for their next game.

    But as I said, I watched them on Saturday, and I can tell you it was absolutely brutal. It was such a physical game.

    But that’s what makes this sport so thrilling – and it’s why Rugby League fans are some of the most diehard out there.

    So to see places where this sport was born, and where it grew…

    …places where rugby league is the lifeblood of the local community…

    …to see those places now host matches that are at the pinnacle of the international game has been absolutely brilliant.

    It’s been a great tournament so far, and we’ve still got all three finals in Manchester next weekend to look forward to.

    And it goes without saying that putting on this kind of event requires an incredible amount of hard work and dedication – particularly when a global pandemic gets in the way. That caused all sorts of delays and difficulties.

    But this room is full of people who battled through all of those challenges, and ultimately made this event possible…

    …from social impact partners, to tournament ambassadors, to the players themselves.

    You haven’t just delivered a major international tournament. You’ve delivered an event that has been genuinely groundbreaking.

    For the first time ever, it’s one where the mens’, womens’ and wheelchair tournaments have all been held at the same time…

    …one where everyone playing has received equal participation fees…

    …and one where women and wheelchair tournament winners will all receive prize money – again, for the first time ever…

    Together, all of those things have sent a very loud signal across the world that rugby league is a sport for all.

    Those kinds of signals really matter. Visibility matters. Particularly for children and other people who might be thinking of taking up the sport, but who assume it’s not for them.

    But thanks to your efforts, they’ll be able to turn on the BBC and see that it is.

    And that’s all while the tournament is going on.

    But of course there’s the legacy, too.

    And the last thing that makes this tournament groundbreaking is that we haven’t waited for the event to be over to get going on that legacy.

    In fact, we’ve flipped it round.

    In the run-up to the event, this tournament had already invested a significant part of the government’s £30 million pot of funding into the grassroots, through its social impact programme.

    It did so by partnering with multiple organisations – many of whom are here today…

    …and that programme has already funded the refurbishment of dozens of clubhouses, changing rooms and artificial pitches – as well as all sorts of equipment, a mental fitness programme, international development and a special volunteer scheme.

    And that was before a single try was even scored.

    It’s a fantastic achievement, and proof that in the end, an event like this is about so much more than sport.

    It’s about uniting communities…

    …it’s about instilling a real sense of pride in the towns and cities that get to host the games…

    …and most of all, it gives us all something to feel good about – in a way that we don’t often get with other things.

    That’s what makes sport so powerful – and you all played a role in that.

    So thank you, and I hope you have a wonderful afternoon celebrating your achievements.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2022 Letter Responding to the Resignation of Gavin Williamson

    Rishi Sunak – 2022 Letter Responding to the Resignation of Gavin Williamson

    The letter sent by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, to Gavin Williamson on 8 November 2022.

    Letter (in .pdf format)