UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Jessica Morden – 2021 Speech on the Terminally Ill and the Benefits System

    Jessica Morden – 2021 Speech on the Terminally Ill and the Benefits System

    The speech made by Jessica Morden, the Labour MP for Newport East, in the House of Commons on 22 February 2021.

    I have brought this debate to the House tonight to urge the Government to announce the results of their review of how the benefits system treats the terminally ill. The review was announced over 19 months ago now, on 11 July 2019, in response to campaigning by charities Marie Curie, the Motor Neurone Disease Association and others. I pay tribute to those charities for all their work on this issue and their support for me in bringing forward my ten-minute rule Bill, the Welfare (Terminal Illness) Bill, last summer. I also thank individual campaigners like Mark Hughes, Dave Setters and so many others who have continued to make a compelling case for change. The same is true of my friend Madeleine Moon, the former MP for Bridgend, who did so much good work on this issue during her time as chair of the all-party group on motor neurone disease. She had first-hand experience of the mental and emotional toil that comes with supporting a loved one with terminal illness. The Bill she brought to the House on this issue in 2018 is the inspiration for the Bill that I brought forward last summer. I have no doubt that the pressure exerted by these and other extraordinary individuals and organisations was instrumental in pushing the Government into announcing the review in July 2019.

    So on their behalf, I again call on the Government today to take urgent action on two elements of the special rules for terminal illness guidelines that are not fit for purpose: the six-month rule, which means that someone is obliged to provide medical proof that they have six months or less to live so that they can access benefits quickly, more sensitively and at a higher rate; and the three-year award, which forces terminally ill people to reapply for benefits in the minority of cases where they are lucky enough to live longer than three years after the benefit is awarded. The special rules for terminal illness process is intended to enable people who are terminally ill to access benefits such as the personal independence payment or universal credit rapidly at the highest level of payments without going through the standard application process. Claiming under the special rules requires the person’s doctor, consultant or specialist nurse to submit a DS1500 form stating that the person is reasonably likely to die within six months. That forces people who have unpredictable terminal illnesses such as motor neurone disease or those expected to live longer than six months to apply via the standard claims process, which involves filling in long forms, attending assessments, delays in payment, lower rates, and even meeting work coaches—all while waiting months for payments. Clearly, that is highly inappropriate for people who have been given the devastating news that their condition is terminal.

    The six-month rule is flawed and urgently needs to change. The all-party group on terminal illness, chaired by the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey (Drew Hendry), found in its 2019 report that it was outdated and arbitrary with no basis in clinical reality. This six-month hard deadline is too much to ask of carers and claimants. It creates a completely understandable resistance to applying, prompting the added pain of writing down the grim reality of daily life and the inevitable future darkness. It gives no hope, no joy in life in a world where hope and joy are often all that can keep you going. In the case of unpredictable illnesses like MND, heart and lung failure and many neurological conditions, it is all but impossible for clinicians to make an accurate prediction of life expectancy. It is little wonder that nearly a third of clinicians told the all-party group that they have never signed a DS1500 form for a patient with a non-cancer condition. That means that patients like Simon, who was diagnosed with MND in December 2020, are not able to access the special rules. His wife Nichola told the MND Association:

    “The doctor said that the DS1500 was designed for cancer patients…He looked at Simon and said ‘you won’t be dead in six months’. We had to complete the whole form and apply under the standard rules. It’s so long winded, so time consuming because you just don’t think about how long you spend on helping him get dressed etc. People need that support…often it feels like you’re banging your head against the wall.”

    This unpredictability is why the three-year award also needs to change. Half of all people with motor neurone disease, for example, die within two years of being diagnosed, while only around 10% live for more than five years, but there is no reliable way for doctors to determine who that 10% will be, and, as with many progressive illnesses, their condition has no prospect of improvement and will only deteriorate further as time goes on. Emma Saysell, from the wonderful St David’s Hospice in Newport, tells me it is seeing more and more cases of cancer patients having to reapply for benefits with the DS1500 after three years. That comes in part due to improvements that have been made in palliative treatment, but while patients are living longer, they are still living with a terminal illness.

    One particular example St David’s presented to me was of a lady in her mid-40s diagnosed with advanced breast cancer. The lady’s prognosis at diagnosis was very poor, and she had two teenage children. It was quite right to submit the DS1500 at diagnosis. Her disease is still progressing, but due to the palliative chemotherapy she has received, the process has been slowed, and she has now lived longer than three years. She has recently had to reapply for all her benefits due to the three-year rule, which has been hugely stressful for her and her family.

    It is a clear anomaly that terminally ill people are awarded benefits for only three years. Employment and support allowance claimants with progressive conditions are entitled to the severe conditions exemption, meaning that they do not have to repeat work capability assessments, while higher-rate PIP claimants can qualify for an ongoing award, with a light-touch review after the 10-year point. It is cruel and absurd that people living with a lifelong condition are entitled to a 10-year or lifetime award, while those with terminal illnesses have been told they must reapply for benefits or risk losing them after just three years. Those who do happen to live longer than three years tell me they feel they are being punished by the system for living too long.

    It is now seven months to the day since I presented my ten-minute rule Bill, and more than 19 months since the then Secretary of State, Amber Rudd, announced a review of how the benefits system treats terminally ill people. In all that time, we have had no official word from the Government on when they intend to bring forward these vital and long-awaited changes to the benefit system.

    Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)

    I commend my hon. Friend for the campaigning work she has been doing on this issue for an extended period, following the work that Madeleine Moon was doing. Scotland introduced its changes to SRTI back in 2018. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is seems very late for the Government here not to have done anything about it? This is all about funding people who desperately need money in the last few months of their lives.

    Jessica Morden

    I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution, and he reads my mind—I am just about to come to that section of my speech. This is an issue across the whole UK, and the devolved Governments of Scotland and Northern Ireland appear to be treating it as a higher priority than the UK Government do. The Scottish Government passed a law to change the six-month rule for devolved benefits back in 2018, and that will be coming into force later this year. The Northern Ireland Assembly unanimously backed a motion to scrap it in October, and the Executive are proactively looking to fix this issue and deliver reform quickly. Why, then, is Westminster dragging its heels?

    When I introduced my Bill last July, the Minister for Disabled People, Welfare and Work indicated that change would be coming shortly. He confirmed in the House on 19 October last year that the Government would be changing the six-month rule following their review. However, all this time later, we are still waiting to hear exactly what it would be changed to and when that change will be introduced. If Ministers have made up their minds that change is needed, why is there any need for further delay? Why the long silence?

    Every day the Government postpone an announcement on the outcome of their review, more people are diagnosed with a terminal illness and risk being unable to get fast-track support from the benefits system if they cannot prove they have less than six months to live. These people are facing exactly the kind of inappropriate medical and work capability assessment that the special rules for terminal illness are supposed to exempt them from before they can access the support they need. They also face huge delays in getting payments. The average wait for a first personal independence payment is now 16 weeks, at a time when someone’s illness may mean that they cannot work and have no other money coming in. These are people like Alan, who has terminal pulmonary fibrosis, and who told Marie Curie:

    “When I was diagnosed, I was told I would have five years’ life expectancy, as an average. Day to day, it affects everything I do. I can’t get dressed by myself. I can’t go to the shop by myself. I get very breathless doing anything. When I first applied for PIP, they were very dismissive. One of the things they did was, because I walked from a lift to a room, which was about 10 steps—on that basis they judged I could walk 200 yards. Because I was refused PIP, I couldn’t get hold of things like a parking card or a discount for train travel. So, I was in receipt of no benefits at all, although I do have a terminal illness, which gets worse year after year, month to month.”

    For some, that delay will mean they die without receiving any support at all. Between April 2018 and October 2019, 2,140 people who applied for PIP—only one of the benefits affected by this rule—had their claim turned down under the normal rules only to die within six months of making their claim. Many of them will have been terminally ill people unable to claim via the special rules because they could not prove they had six months to live.

    Even when the DWP does accept a claim, that often comes too late. According to the DWP’s own figures, an average of 10 people die every day while waiting for a decision on their PIP claim. End-of-life charity Marie Curie estimates that that means more than 5,900 people have died waiting for a decision since the DWP announced its review. That is nearly 6,000 families put through needless distress and anguish, and more will face it every day because of a rule that the Government have already admitted needs to change.

    That is families like Michelle’s. Her mum, who died aged 62 in 2018, was initially awarded zero points for PIP and told she was capable of working. She was hooked to a feeding tube 16 hours a day, seven days a week and weighed 32 kilograms when she died. She had several illnesses including Crohn’s, osteoporosis and terminal lung cancer, yet she was awarded nothing. Michelle took her mum’s case to a tribunal, but by the time the decision came back that her mother should be awarded maximum points for PIP, she had died. Michelle says:

    “This should have been money that my mum had to make her final days better. It should never have gone as far as a tribunal.”

    Dying people deserve to be treated with dignity by the benefits system. Nobody given the devastating news that their illness is terminal knows how long they have left—not their loved ones, not their doctor and not a DWP benefits assessor. However much time they have left should be spent living as well as they can for as long as they can, making memories with loved ones. It should not be spent worrying about money, filling in endless forms, being dragged to assessments and fighting for the support they need. As Madeleine Moon said back in 2018,

    “The unknown time you have must not be spent worrying about accessing benefits or keeping a roof over your head; it must be spent in love, laughter, and taking the painful journey together with dignity and compassion.”—[Official Report, 18 July 2018; Vol. 645, c. 456.]

    People living with terminal illness and their loved ones have been campaigning tirelessly for change for more than two years. Many of them will not have lived to see the change they have fought for: an end to the six-month and three-year rules and a change to the system to allow anyone who has received the devastating news from a clinician that they are terminally ill to get fast-tracked access to benefits via the special rules. The clinician’s judgment should be evidence enough.

    We all understand that since the Government announced their review there have been unforeseen circumstances with covid-19, but people do not have time to wait further. For the past 19 months, they have been waiting in a frustrating limbo, told that change is coming but with no announcement in sight from Ministers. They, and the charities campaigning on their behalf, are understandably impatient with 19 months of warm words from the Government and promises that change is always coming soon. For many, soon is already too late and, with each day that passes, soon will be too late for many more.

    I urge Ministers to do better than soon. Will the Minister give us a date today for when the outcome of the DWP review will be published, give the campaigners who have called for change some clarity and give us a timeline setting out when the Government will make the changes to the law, which they have already accepted are needed, without further delay?

  • Robert Jenrick – 2021 Statement on Local Government Reorganisation

    Robert Jenrick – 2021 Statement on Local Government Reorganisation

    The statement made by Robert Jenrick, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, in the House of Commons on 22 February 2021.

    As I told the House on 12 October 2020, c. 6-7 WS, I have issued invitations under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (the 2007 Act) to principal councils in Cumbria, North Yorkshire, and Somerset, including associated existing unitary councils, to submit proposals for moving to unitary local government in those areas.

    On 9 December, I received eight locally led proposals—four from councils in Cumbria, two from councils in North Yorkshire and two from councils in Somerset. In the case of each area there is a proposal made by the county council for a unitary authority covering the whole area. In the cases of North Yorkshire and Somerset, there is a proposal from district councils for two unitary authorities in each area. In Cumbria district councils have made three proposals, each of which involves establishing two unitary authorities.

    Today I have launched a consultation on all eight proposals. I would welcome views from any interested person, including residents, and I am consulting the councils which made the proposals, other councils affected by the proposals, and councils in neighbouring areas. I am also consulting public service providers, including health providers and the police, local enterprise partnerships, and certain other business, voluntary sector and educational bodies.

    The consultation period will run for eight weeks until Monday 19 April. The consultation document is available and those responding may do so on the Department’s online platform “Citizen Space” or by email or post. The consultation will provide information to help my assessment of the merits of each proposal, and I will carefully consider all the representations I receive, along with all other relevant information available to me.

    The context of this consultation is that the 2007 Act provides that before any proposal is implemented I must consult any council affected by the proposal that did not make it and any other persons I consider appropriate. Once the consultation is concluded, I will decide, subject to parliamentary approval, which, if any, proposals are to be implemented, with or without modification. In taking these decisions I will have regard to all the representations I have received, including those from the consultation, and all other relevant information available to me, and reach a balanced judgement assessing the proposals against the three criteria—whether they are likely to improve local government and service delivery across the area of the proposal, whether they command a good deal of local support as assessed in the round across the whole area of the proposal, and whether the area of any new unitary council is a credible geography.

    I am also announcing today that I intend as soon as practicable to make and lay before Parliament orders under the Local Government Act 2000 to reschedule the ordinary elections to principal councils in the three areas due to be held on 6 May 2021 for one year to May 2022. The elections for local police and crime commissioners, as well as elections to any town or parish councils, will continue to take place in May 2021.

    In deciding to reschedule the 6 May 2021 local elections to principal councils in the three areas, I have carefully considered all the representations I have received including the views expressed by councils. I have also had regard both to the importance of local elections as the foundation of our local democracy and ensuring the accountability of councils to local people, and to the risks of continuing with the May 2021 elections in the areas when consultations are taking place on proposals which could, if implemented, result in the abolition of those councils. Elections in such circumstances risk confusing voters and would be hard to justify where members could be elected to serve shortened terms.

    Accordingly, I have concluded that, irrespective of what my future decisions might be on the restructuring proposals, the right course is to reschedule the May 2021 local elections. If no unitary proposal is implemented in an area, the rescheduled elections will take place in May 2022. If a unitary proposal is implemented the rescheduled elections will be replaced by elections in May 2022 to the new unitary authority or authorities which could be in shadow form or a continuing council taking on the functions of the other councils in the area.

    Finally, I would reiterate that the Government will not impose top-down Government solutions. We will continue, as I am now currently doing, to follow a locally led approach where councils can develop proposals which have strong local support. This has been the Government’s consistent approach since 2010, when top-down restructuring was stopped through the Local Government Act 2010. When considering reform, those in an area will know what is best—the very essence of localism to which the Government remain committed.

  • Amanda Solloway – Postgraduate Student Funding

    Amanda Solloway – Postgraduate Student Funding

    The statement made by Amanda Solloway, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 22 February 2021.

    I am tabling this statement for the benefit of hon. and right hon. Members, to bring to their attention the support that the Government are providing to United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) funded doctoral students to address the challenges related to covid-19 restrictions.

    When lockdown began last year, UKRI communicated immediately that PhD studentships should not be suspended, ensuring students could continue to receive their stipends. In April 2020, £44 million of urgent funding was announced for up to six-month extensions for PhD students in their final year who could not complete their studies as originally planned due to covid-19 restrictions. This was taken up by 77% of eligible students.

    In November 2020, a further £19.1 million was allocated to research organisations hosting UKRI funded students. This enabled those organisations to target additional support to those UKRI funded students who needed it most including those whose study had been impacted by caring responsibilities or health reasons, and those in their final year.

    These two phases of funding amount to £63 million of funding and will provide support to approximately 10,000 students.

    Since the introduction of the current restrictions in January, the Government have continued to monitor the impact on the research sector. I asked UKRI to explore what else could be done to help and I can now confirm that we will be providing additional support to UKRI funded PhD students.

    A further £7 million will now be made available to allocate extensions, based on need, to those students still to complete their studies. Additionally, UKRI are exploring options to increase flexibility for grant holding organisations to allocate existing funding for training and cohort development activity to fund extensions.

    Research England will also be delivering around £11 million of block grant funding to English universities as a contribution to their support for their postgraduate research communities, including to students funded by universities themselves and to self-financed students.

    By the end of this phase of support funding, UKRI will have provided additional support totalling £70 million, including extensions, to around half of all their funded students who were studying at the start of the first lockdown extension. This support has been targeted at those most in need and with equality, diversity and inclusion considered throughout.

    Ensuring that the research sector in the UK has the people and skills it needs is crucial to realising Government’s ambition to cement our status as a science superpower. We will continue to monitor this situation closely, to ensure that we are able to consider additional support if necessary.

  • Gavin Williamson – 2021 Statement on Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom

    Gavin Williamson – 2021 Statement on Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom

    The statement made by Gavin Williamson, the Secretary of State for Education, in the House of Commons on 22 February 2021.

    Last week the Department for Education laid the “Higher education: free speech and academic freedom” Command Paper in Parliament and then published it more widely. This sets out how Government propose to deliver on their 2019 manifesto commitment to strengthen academic freedom and freedom of speech in universities in England.

    This Government have always been clear in their commitment to strengthen academic freedom and ensure that our universities are places where free speech can thrive. Without action to counter attempts to discourage or even silence unpopular views, intellectual life on campus for both staff and students may be unfairly narrowed and diminished.

    Despite protections which are currently in place, a body of research has shown evidence of a “chilling effect” on students and staff, who report feeling unable freely to express their views within the law without fear of repercussion. This is emphasised by a small number of high-profile incidents in which staff or students have been threatened with negative consequences, sometimes successfully, confirming that the fear of repercussion is not always unfounded. The Government therefore consider it necessary to take action, including by amending legislation.

    This Command Paper identifies key limitations of the current framework and proposes a clear way forward, to clarify and strengthen the legislation on freedom of speech and academic freedom, and thereby ensure that the aforementioned “chilling effect” is effectively dealt with. Freedom of speech and academic freedom are fundamental principles of university life, and it is our duty to afford the necessary protections where these are found to be lacking. The Government intend to take action after carefully considering and discussing the options laid out in this paper with stakeholders. We will announce further steps in due course.

    I will place copies of the Command Paper in the Libraries of both Houses.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on the Advance Research and Invention Agency

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on the Advance Research and Invention Agency

    The statement made by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 22 February 2021.

    The UK has a proud history of scientific excellence and invention. Charles Babbage, Ada Lovelace and, later, Alan Turing pioneered early predecessors of the computer. Thomas Newcomen and James Watt gave us the steam engine, and Michael Faraday gave us the modern battery.

    This Government are committed to continuing this tradition and cementing our role as a science superpower. That is why our manifesto committed to creating a new funding agency, focused on high-risk, high-reward research. I am pleased to update the House that we will be fulfilling this commitment through a new Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA), and we will also be introducing a Bill as soon as parliamentary time allows to create this body.

    ARIA will have the sole focus to fund ground-breaking research—research that sparks transformational societal change through the creation of new technologies and new industries.

    With £800 million committed to ARIA up to 2024-25, ARIA will form a central part of delivering on our R&D road map, published in July 2020, to ensure the UK is the best place for scientists, researchers, and entrepreneurs to live and work, while helping to power up the UK’s economic and social recovery.

    As we have developed ARIA, we have sought best practice from international partners. Success stories include DARPA in the US, whose predecessor, ARPA, was instrumental in creating transformational technologies like the internet and GPS. More recently, DARPA has been behind precursors to technologies such as Apple’s SIRI.

    We have also listened to the scientific community about how these models can best be adapted for the UK to enhance our R&D offer. This includes ensuring ARIA complements existing funders and makes a distinct contribution to the wider R&D landscape. To this end, ARIA will have a bespoke purpose and structure, and will work in partnership with UKRI and across the ecosystem.

    ARIA’s key features will be:

    A singular focus on high-risk, high reward research funding. ARIA will provide support for transformational, long-term science and technology. ARIA will not be restricted in whether it funds pure science, applied science, or technological development—in fact, often it will do aspects of each within a single programme.

    A high tolerance for risk and failure. Failure is part of the scientific process, and particularly central to finding the technological breakthroughs that have the potential to create the industries and jobs of the future. ARIA will not shy away from high risk, in the pursuit of high rewards.

    Minimal bureaucracy. The recent approach to covid-19 rapid response funds and the vaccine taskforce has led to a cultural shift around funding and decision making, towards a more lean and agile system, and ARIA will continue this trend. It will have an innovative approach to funding, with the ability to use mechanisms such as seed grants and prizes to ensure the best support for the best ideas. ARIA’s programme managers will be able to pull in scientists on projects within in a matter of weeks.

    To empower exceptional talent. ARIA will be run by exceptional scientists who have the expertise to identify the most exciting and ground-breaking research to invest in. Government will invest in these exceptional individuals, empowering them to use their expertise to identify what research to back rather than providing a research focus for the organisation, and giving them the freedom to start and stop projects quickly and redirect funding efficiently.

    Alongside the Bill, we will recruit a visionary CEO and experienced chair. They will develop ARIA by setting the agenda, shaping the culture, and building an exceptional team for the agency.

    ARIA will further diversify our rich and dynamic R&D system, taking us to the next level of scientific and technological advances. Its successes stand to have an impact on how we fund R&D in the future, and ensure we maintain our outstanding global reputation for innovation and discovery.

  • Boris Johnson – 2021 Roadmap Statement in the House of Commons

    Boris Johnson – 2021 Roadmap Statement in the House of Commons

    The statement made by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 22 February 2021.

    Mr Speaker, with permission, I will make a Statement on the roadmap that will guide us

    cautiously but irreversibly –

    towards reclaiming our freedoms while doing all we can to protect our people against Covid.

    Today’s measures will apply in England,

    but we are working closely with the Devolved Administrations who are setting out similar plans.

    The threat remains substantial, with the numbers in hospital only now beginning to fall below the peak of the first wave in April.

    But we are able to take these steps because of the resolve of the British public

    and the extraordinary success of our NHS in vaccinating more than 17.5 million people across the UK.

    The data so far suggests both vaccines are effective against the dominant strains of Covid.

    Public Health England has found that one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine reduces hospitalisations and deaths by at least 75 per cent.

    And early data suggests that the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine provides a good level of protection,

    though since we only started deploying this vaccine last month, at this stage the size of its effect is less certain.

    But no vaccine can ever be 100 per cent effective,

    nor will everyone take them up,

    and like all viruses, Covid-19 will mutate. So, as the modelling released by SAGE today shows, we cannot escape the fact that lifting lockdown will result in more cases, more hospitalisations and sadly more deaths.

    This would happen whenever lockdown is lifted, whether now or in six or nine months, because there will always be some vulnerable people who are not protected by the vaccine.

    There is therefore no credible route to a Zero Covid Britain or indeed a Zero Covid World

    and we cannot persist indefinitely with restrictions that debilitate our economy, our physical and mental well-being, and the life-chances of our children.

    And that is why it is so crucial that this roadmap should be cautious but also irreversible.

    We are setting out on what I hope and believe is a one way road to freedom.

    And this journey is made possible by the pace of the vaccination programme.

    In England, everyone in the top four priority groups was successfully offered a vaccine by the middle of February.

    We now aim to offer a first dose to all those in groups 5 to 9 by 15 April,

    and I am setting another stretching target: to offer a first dose to every adult by the end of July.

    As more of us are inoculated, so the protection afforded by the vaccines will gradually replace the restrictions

    and today’s roadmap sets out the principles of that transition.

    The level of infection is broadly similar across England, so we will ease restrictions in all areas at the same time.

    The sequence will be driven by the evidence, so outdoor activity will be prioritised as the best way to restore freedoms while minimising the risk.

    At every stage, our decisions will be led by data not dates,

    and subjected to four tests.

    First, that the vaccine deployment programme continues successfully;

    second, that evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths;

    third, that infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS;

    and fourth, that our assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new variants of Covid that cause concern.

    Before taking each step we will review the data against these tests and because it takes at least four weeks for the data to reflect the impact of relaxations in restrictions

    and we want to give the country a week’s notice before each change –

    there will be at least five weeks between each step.

    The Chief Medical Officer is clear that moving any faster would mean acting before we know the impact of each step,

    which would increase the risk of us having to reverse course and re-impose restrictions.

    I won’t take that risk.

    Step one will happen from 8 March, by which time those in the top four priority groups will be benefiting from the increased protection they receive from their first dose of their vaccine.

    Mr Speaker, all the evidence shows that classrooms are the best places for our young people to be.

    That’s why I’ve always said that schools would be the last to close and the first to reopen.

    And based on our assessment of the current data against the four tests, I can tell the House that two weeks’ from today pupils and students in all schools and further education settings can safely return to face-to-face teaching,

    supported by twice-weekly testing of secondary school and college pupils.

    Families and childcare bubbles will also be encouraged to get tested regularly.

    Breakfast and afterschool clubs can also re-open – and other children’s activities, including sport, can restart where necessary to help parents to work.

    Students on university courses requiring practical teaching, specialist facilities or onsite assessments will also return

    but all others will need to continue learning online, and we will review the options for when they can return by the end of the Easter Holidays.

    From 8 March, people will also be able to meet one person from outside their household for outdoor recreation – such as a coffee on a bench or a picnic in a park – in addition to exercise.

    But we are advising the Clinically Extremely Vulnerable to shield at least until the end of March.

    Every care home resident will be able to nominate a named visitor, able to see them regularly provided they are tested and wear PPE.

    And finally we will amend regulations to enable a broader range of Covid-secure campaign activities for local elections on 6 May.

    As part of Step one, we will go further and make limited changes on 29 March, when schools go on Easter holidays.

    It will become possible to meet in limited numbers outdoors, where the risk is lower.

    So the Rule of Six will return outdoors, including in private gardens

    and outdoor meetings of two households will also be permitted on the same basis, so that families in different circumstances can meet. Outdoor sports facilities – such as tennis and basketball courts, and open-air swimming pools – will be able to reopen

    and formally organised outdoor sports will resume, subject to guidance.

    From this point, 29 March, people will no longer be legally required to stay at home

    but many lockdown restrictions will remain.

    People should continue to work from home where they can and minimise all travel wherever possible.

    Step two will begin at least five weeks after the beginning of step one

    and no earlier than 12 April, with an announcement at least seven days in advance.

    If analysis of the latest data against the four tests requires a delay, then this and subsequent steps will also be delayed to maintain the five week gap.

    In step two non-essential retail will reopen, as will personal care including hairdressers I’m glad to say, and nail salons.

    Indoor leisure facilities such as gyms will re-open, as will holiday-lets, but only for use by individuals or household groups.

    We will begin to re-open our pubs and restaurants outdoors

    and Hon Members will be relieved there will be no curfew

    and the Scotch Egg debate will be over because there will be no requirement for alcohol to be accompanied by a substantial meal.

    Zoos, theme parks and drive-in cinemas will re-open

    as will public libraries and community centres.

    Step three will begin no earlier than 17 May.

    Provided the data satisfies the four tests, most restrictions on meetings outdoors will be lifted, subject to a limit of thirty.

    And this is the point when you will be able to see your friends and family indoors – subject to the Rule of Six or the meeting of two households.

    We will also reopen pubs and restaurants indoors

    along with cinemas and children’s play areas,

    hotels, hostels, and B&Bs.

    Theatres and concert halls will open their doors,

    and the turnstiles of our sports stadia will once again rotate

    subject in all cases to capacity limits depending on the size of the venue.

    And we will pilot larger events using enhanced testing, with the ambition of further easing of restrictions in the next step.

    Step 4 will begin no earlier than 21 June.

    With appropriate mitigations, we will aim to remove all legal limits on social contact,

    and on weddings and other life events.

    We will re-open everything up to and including nightclubs,

    and enable large events such as theatre performances above the limits of step 3, potentially using testing to reduce the risk of infection.

    Mr Speaker, our journey back towards normality will be subject to resolving a number of key questions and to do this we will conduct four reviews.

    One will assess how long we need to maintain social distancing and face masks.

    This will also inform guidance on working from home – which should continue wherever possible until this review is complete.

    And it will be critical in determining how Parliament can safely return in a way that I know Hon Members would wish.

    A second review will consider the resumption of international travel

    which is vital for many businesses which have been hardest hit

    including retail, hospitality, tourism and aviation.

    A successor to the Global Travel Taskforce will report by 12 April so that people can plan for the summer.

    The third review will consider the potential role of Covid-status certification in helping venues to open safely

    but mindful of the many concerns surrounding exclusion, discrimination and privacy.

    And the fourth review will look at the safe return of major events.

    Mr Speaker, as we proceed through these steps we will benefit from the combined protection of our vaccines and the continued expansion of rapid testing.

    We will extend the provision of free test kits for workplaces until the end of June

    and families, small businesses and the self-employed can collect those tests from local testing sites.

    Mr Speaker, in view of these cautious but I hope irreversible changes, people may be concerned about what these changes mean for the various support packages, for livelihoods for people and for the economy.

    So I want to assure the House, we will not pull the rug out.

    For the duration of the pandemic, the government will continue to do whatever it takes to protect jobs and livelihoods across the UK.

    And my Rt Hon Friend the Chancellor will set out further details in the Budget next Wednesday,

    Finally, Mr Speaker, we must remain alert to the constant mutations of the virus.

    Next month we will publish an updated plan for responding to local outbreaks,

    with a range of measures to address variants of concern, including surge PCR testing and enhanced contact tracing.

    We can’t, I’m afraid, rule out re-imposing restrictions at local or regional level if evidence suggests they are necessary to contain or suppress a new variant which escapes the vaccines.

    Mr Speaker, I know there will be many people who will be worried that we are being too ambitious and that it is arrogant to impose any kind of plan upon a virus.

    And I agree that we must always be humble in the face of nature and we must be cautious

    but I really also believe that the vaccination programme has dramatically changed the odds in our favour and it is on that basis that we can now proceed.

    And of course there will be others who will believe that we could go faster on the basis of that vaccination programme

    and I understand their feelings and I sympathise very much with the exhaustion and the stress that people are experiencing and that businesses are experiencing after so long in lockdown.

    But to them I say that today the end really is in sight and a wretched year will give way to a spring and a summer that will be very different and incomparably better than the picture we see around us today.

    And in that spirit, I commend this Statement to the House.

  • Maurice Corry – 2021 Comments on Scotland Men’s Sheds Movement

    Maurice Corry – 2021 Comments on Scotland Men’s Sheds Movement

    The speech made by Maurice Corry, the Conservative MSP for West Scotland, on 22 February 2021.

    I am delighted to bring the motion for debate today. Scotland’s men’s sheds movement has become an ever-important fixture across our local communities. Each shed is living proof that every person is of value and has something to contribute.

    The movement could not have developed as it has without the work of the Scottish Men’s Shed Association. The SMSA has over 180 registered men’s sheds that are either up and running or in development, spread across all 32 council areas. The association, along with Age Scotland and other partners, has long raised awareness of why those groups deserve our full attention. Run completely by volunteers, men’s sheds are open, welcoming places for men to put their capabilities to practical use by learning and sharing new skills, which can be as wide ranging as woodworking, furniture repair, gardening and cookery. More than that, these spaces provide those who attend, who are known as shedders, the opportunity for shoulder-to-shoulder friendship and camaraderie.

    My region of West Scotland is privileged to have such sheds at the heart of its communities. There is the amazing work of the Clydebank men’s shed and the Saltcoats men’s shed, which I have visited in recent months. Both have done well in a recent competition. There is also the Garnock valley men’s shed in Kilbirnie. I was particularly impressed with some veterans who had joined the one in Kilbirnie, one of whom said that, with the help of his colleagues, he had managed to turn his life around.

    Free from any obligations or expectations, members have a real sense of ownership of their sheds, each of which is shaped by their own interests and accomplishments. That ethos underpins the entire movement and points to why it is so clearly successful. That is especially the case from a health and wellbeing perspective. An Age Scotland study on the so-called “shed effect” showed that many shedders have found renewed purpose in their lives through their involvement, which they feel has had a direct and positive impact on their mental and physical health. For some, their local shed is a way to overcome loneliness or mental ill health in a place where they feel at home. For others, it is a valuable way to use their time in retirement or a welcome distraction from life’s burdens.

    The local, asset-based voluntary model of the men’s sheds movement is key to how it impacts people’s lives. A ground-breaking study by Glasgow Caledonian University recently captured that by highlighting that the key value of men’s sheds—that they are run by men, for men—means that formalising or pigeonholing men’s sheds into a healthcare role is not the answer. Instead of being overburdened, shedders, who already face challenges, deserve to be equipped with greater, long-term financial support to further galvanise them to do what they already do well: engage men in their own health management entirely on an informal and voluntary basis.

    The Scottish Men’s Shed Association is passionate about its aim of attracting groups who can be more hidden or harder to reach. In that regard, its recent work to forge links with veterans—which is beginning to take place in co-operation with the veterans of the unforgotten forces consortium—will, I am sure, be a valuable way for ex-service personnel to reintegrate into their communities. I sincerely look forward to seeing the outcome of that work.

    The role of men’s sheds in improving health and wellbeing means that they have, over time, become an important part of their community fabric. As well as offering a space in which to signpost local services and information, shedders make a tangible difference to community life, whether through local tree planting, fundraisers for local charities or the creation of a community garden. Their warm and vibrant involvement, which emanates inclusivity, is a prime example of grass-roots community empowerment at its best.

    As so many community organisations have, men’s sheds have felt the impact of Covid-19 keenly, and, in keeping with guidance, sheds continue to be closed through the lockdown. On-going pressures on fundraising and the acquisition of suitable premises have grown more prevalent, which has presented challenges for sheds in maintaining sustainability and resourcefulness. Therefore, the Scottish Government’s funding grant of £30,000 in response to those challenges is welcome, and I am sure it will go some way towards assisting groups.

    With advice from the SMSA and Age Scotland, shedders have sought to stay connected, whether through phone calls, social media or buddy systems, and they have helped the more vulnerable in new and innovative ways. Some have collected shopping for those who are shielding, and some have helped with personal protective equipment production. Others have made bird tables and benches for the benefit of local care homes. Moreover, the Inverclyde men’s shed group, who were winners of the SMSA shed of the year 2020—well done to them—helped to organise a soup shed for local families and constructed street food larders for Belville Community Garden. As the chairman said, such small acts of kindness and markers of community resilience show that men’s sheds are certainly worthy of our appreciation.

    The pandemic has emphasised what we already know to be true: men’s sheds are invaluable as a community-based organisation. They are vital in forging connections and enhancing men’s health and wellbeing. At the same time, the movement recasts our idea of ageing and later life, showing that positivity and opportunity know no bounds. Despite the additional stress that Covid-19 has placed on shedders, they have learned that nothing can be taken for granted, especially our connections with those around us.

    Far from taking the movement for granted, it is for policymakers and stakeholders to ensure that men’s sheds are supported in the long term. As they and other community-based organisations come alongside older people as we emerge from the pandemic, I hope that tailored guidance will be forthcoming from the Scottish Government to assist them. They are a clear asset to our communities and a critical way of safeguarding wellbeing, and our response must reflect that.

  • Boris Johnson – 2021 Comments on the Roadmap Announcement

    Boris Johnson – 2021 Comments on the Roadmap Announcement

    The comments made by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 22 February 2021.

    Today I’ll be setting out a roadmap to bring us out of lockdown cautiously. Our priority has always been getting children back into school which we know is crucial for their education as well as their mental and physical wellbeing, and we will also be prioritising ways for people to reunite with loved ones safely.

    Our decisions will be made on the latest data at every step, and we will be cautious about this approach so that we do not undo the progress we have achieved so far and the sacrifices each and every one of you has made to keep yourself and others safe.

    We have therefore set four key tests which must be met before we can move through each step of the plan.

     

  • Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement to the UN Human Rights Council

    Dominic Raab – 2021 Statement to the UN Human Rights Council

    The statement made by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, on 22 February 2021.

    Madam President, Excellencies.

    The UK places the promotion and protection of human rights at the very top of our list of international priorities. So we are very pleased to return to the Human Rights Council. And we will continue to uphold and defend the international rule of law, and the rights and freedoms of people right around the world.

    We place a particular focus on: championing freedom of religion and belief; defending media freedom; and also championing the values of liberal democracy. We will use all of the diplomatic and development levers available to us to pursue these ends, support states to meet their human rights obligations, and uphold the values on which the United Nations was founded.

    The Human Rights Council has a key role to play. And at this moment, when we see the democratic dominoes falling across the world, when we see appalling human rights violations, and when we see some governments using Covid as a pretext to row back on personal freedoms, the Council’s role is even more important than ever.

    But, like any institution, we know the Council is not perfect. Some members do not meet the human rights standards we vow to uphold. And the Council’s agenda does not consistently reflect where the most pressing human rights issues are. We need to address that, as well as other institutional concerns. For our part, the UK will continue to engage with all sides to find ways to do so. For example, we must find ways to reduce the practical barriers to small island developing states engaging fully.

    This Council lives up to the best traditions of the United Nations when it shines a spotlight on the very worst violations of human rights, and demands accountability for those responsible. So let me highlight some of the most pressing human rights situations that we see today.

    The position in Myanmar gets worse. The violations and abuses are well-documented, including arbitrary detention and draconian restrictions on freedom of expression. That crisis presents an increased risk to the Rohingya and other ethnic minorities. That’s why the UK and the EU led a special session of the Council on this issue earlier in the month. It resulted in a consensus resolution demonstrating the strength of feeling in the Council about the actions of the military.

    The UK has also led strong statements from the G7 and the UN Security Council condemning the situation. The UK is sanctioning individuals for serious human rights violations that took place during the coup. The military must step aside. Civilian leaders must be released. And the democratic wishes of the people of Myanmar must be respected. That’s why at this session we will again cosponsor the resolution renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar, so he can continue his essential work.

    Let me now turn to Belarus. Last year’s rigged Presidential elections and Mr Lukashenko’s brutal crackdown against those calling for change has resulted in a human rights crisis. There is no other way to describe it.

    The UK has been at the vanguard of the international response. This includes an OSCE investigation, an urgent debate at the Council in September, and greater support for civil society and the independent media. With Canada, we acted decisively in implementing sanctions against Lukashenko and his inner circle.

    Now, this Council must continue with a comprehensive investigation of human rights violations, including accusations of torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Belarusian authorities must stop their campaign of repression, agree to meaningful dialogue and now hold new elections. The UK will support initiatives to keep Belarus on the Council’s agenda for as long as it is necessary, and until the Belarusian people are able to enjoy their democratic rights and their fundamental freedoms.

    Now turning to Russia, where we face a truly dire and shocking situation from a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council. The authorities there must respect citizens’ human rights, including the right to freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial, and the freedom from torture.

    We are deeply concerned by the legislative amendments and constitutional changes which amount to a wholesale attack on individual rights and freedoms. That includes allowing ordinary individuals to be treated as foreign agents. It is disgraceful that Alexey Navalny, himself the victim of a despicable crime, has now been sentenced on arbitrary charges.

    The UK has sanctioned six individuals and an entity responsible for Mr Navalny’s poisoning. His treatment and the violence inflicted on peaceful protesters can only further reinforce the world’s concerns that Russia is failing to meet its international obligations. We’ve made our concerns clear here in this Council as well as at the G7, at the OSCE and in the Council of Europe. And we call on other members of the Council to consider whether Russia’s actions are in line with its international human rights obligations and the values that we seek and that we have pledged to uphold.

    Now, I must address China. We stand with the growing number of international partners, UN experts and NGOs concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation that we see in China. No one can ignore the evidence anymore.

    In Hong Kong, the rights of the people are being systematically violated. The National Security Law is a clear breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and is having a chilling effect on personal freedoms. Free and fair legislative elections must take place, with a range of opposition voices allowed to take part.

    In Tibet the situation remains deeply concerning, with access still heavily restricted. Meanwhile, we see almost daily reports now that shine a new light on China’s systematic human rights violations perpetrated against Uyghur Muslims and other minorities in Xinjiang. The situation in Xinjiang is beyond the pale. The reported abuses – which include torture, forced labour and forced sterilisation of women – are extreme and they are extensive. They are taking place on an industrial scale. It must be our collective duty to ensure this does not go unanswered.

    UN mechanisms must respond. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, or another independent fact-finding expert, must – and I repeat must – be given urgent and unfettered access to Xinjiang. If members of this Human Rights Council are to live up to our responsibilities, there must be a resolution which secures this access.

    The UK will live up to our responsibilities. So last month, I announced measures aimed at ensuring that no company profiting from forced labour in Xinjiang can do business in the UK, and that no UK businesses are involved in their supply chains. We will continue to raise our voice for the people of Hong Kong and for minorities in China suffering this appalling treatment. And we urge others who share our commitment to open societies and universal human rights to speak up.

    Finally, we will continue to lead action in this Council: on Syria, as we do at each session; on South Sudan; and on Sri Lanka, where we will present a new resolution to maintain the focus on reconciliation and on accountability.

    Madam President, we want to see an effective international human rights system that holds to account those who systematically violate human rights. The Human Rights Council must be ready to play its role in full, or I fear we will see its reputation sorely damaged.

    The UK wants the Council to succeed. And we will work with our international partners. We will continue to speak up in this Council for what is right. And we will continue to back up our words with actions.

    Thank you.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Allegations Relating to Matt Hancock’s Neighbour

    Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Allegations Relating to Matt Hancock’s Neighbour

    The comments made by Rachel Reeves, the Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, on 22 February 2021.

    This is extremely worrying and the reasons for handing this contract out in the first place must be investigated and shared in the public interest.

    The Government needs to get a grip on the cronyism and waste marring its pandemic procurement. It must be far more transparent and publish outstanding contracts and details of the VIP fast lane now.