PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Business of the House - 1 February 2024 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
Monday 5 February—Remaining stages of the Finance Bill.
Tuesday 6 February—Opposition day (4th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.
Wednesday 7 February—Motions related to the police grant and local government finance reports.
Thursday 8 February—General debate on National HIV Testing Week, followed by a general debate on the management culture of the Post Office. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
The House will rise for the February recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 8 February and return on Monday 19 February.
I start by expressing our profound regret that the hon. Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer) has decided to step down due to fears for his safety and that of his family. The recent attack on his office was horrific. That any Member is forced from office due to intimidation, threats and fear is an attack on all of us and what we represent. It is unacceptable and we must do more to protect our freedoms and democracy. We stand together.
Yesterday, Alison Phillips was “banged out” of the newsroom in her last day as editor of the Daily Mirror. Alison broke the mould for female journalists, and she led a number of campaigns that had a direct effect on this place. She leaves a proud legacy.
Last week I asked the Leader of the House about the Procedure Committee report on scrutiny of Lords Secretaries of State. Has she now digested it, and when will she bring forward a motion to make it happen? I will chalk it up as a victory that, after many weeks of asking, Foreign Office Ministers finally came forward with a statement this week on the ongoing conflict in Gaza and Israel. Will the Leader of the House ensure that that happens more often, with the Foreign Secretary himself taking questions? The situation demands it.
The International Court of Justice interim ruling was deeply significant and makes for difficult reading. We are clear that Israel must comply with the orders in the ruling in full, and that Hamas must release all the hostages immediately. International law must be upheld and the independence of international courts respected, with all sides held accountable for their actions. Twenty-five thousand innocent people are dead, including thousands of women and children, and 85% of the population of Gaza have been displaced and millions face the risk of famine. We cannot let innocent Palestinians pay the price. We must redouble our efforts for a sustainable ceasefire and a political process for a two-state solution.
On that, I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s willingness to recognise the state of Palestine, which is a policy we have long supported. We hear this morning that Secretary of State Blinken is moving the US in that direction, too. As the Leader of the Opposition said, it is an
“inalienable right of the Palestinian people”.
Can the Leader of the House clarify, as there is some confusion, the Government’s policy on the recognition of Palestine?
Talking of Secretaries of State being accountable, perhaps the Leader of the House can clear up some of the creative use of language by the Home Secretary in his appearance before the Home Affairs Committee yesterday. Apparently, we no longer have a backlog of asylum claims; it is just “a queue” of 94,000 applicants—some queue, but definitely not a backlog. The 33,000 asylum seekers who have gone missing apparently are not missing, but have simply “disengaged”. Does the Leader of the House recognise that the Government have lost control of the asylum system and that smoke and mirrors cannot hide the truth?
The Business Secretary was not exactly forthcoming with the truth this week either. On Monday, she told this House that negotiations with Canada to save British car imports were “ongoing”, but now we learn that she walked out of those discussions and the entire issue is on pause. Does the Leader of the House want to take this opportunity to correct the record?
Finally, I cannot let business questions go by without referring to the Leader of the House’s rather bizarre, unprompted, over the top, glowing tribute to the Prime Minister in last week’s business questions. I feel the lady does protest too much. It was as if she was at “The Traitors” roundtable, desperately wanting everyone to believe she really is a faithful. It seems that the traitors sit among them still, secretly planning their next kill. The evil plotters are trying to avoid banishment so they can win the prize. Can she reveal herself today, because we all want to know? Perhaps some of her colleagues can, too, or perhaps they should do us all a favour, cut straight to the endgame and let the public decide. Quite honestly, much as I love “The Traitors”, this is not a TV show, and their antics have real-life consequences. As much as we are all sick of watching it, unfortunately, there is no off-switch.
This week I met Ashley, the cousin of 19-year-old hostage Agam Berger. She is the girl that many Members will have seen in video footage, playing her violin in happier times. She volunteered with special educational needs children, and was actively involved in working towards a peaceful solution in her region. I thank the shadow Leader of the House for her remarks about the hostages and all Members who are working hard to keep the spotlight on these people and their families. I hope that they will all be home soon.
I also thank the hon. Lady for her remarks about my hon. Friend the Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer), who has said that he is going to stand down because of his safety and the wellbeing of his family. Such attacks on elected Members are attacks on democracy itself. I know that many hon. and right hon. Members and their families are enduring such threats. We condemn such actions and those who encourage, incite and excuse them. I thank the hon. Lady for her cross- party support on that matter.
I join the hon. Lady in paying tribute to Alison, who was “banged out” of the newsroom. I also thank her colleagues who posted that on social media. I think it sends a very positive message for women in particular who want to work in that sector.
The hon. Lady asks about the Procedure Committee, and I again thank the Committee for its report on holding to account the Foreign Secretary on a range of issues. She will know that the recommendations in part rely on the consent of their noble Lords, and I am keen to hear the views of their Procedure Committee on some of the recommendations that our Procedure Committee has made. Since the Foreign Secretary was appointed, there have been 41 sitting days, and in that time Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Ministers, including the Foreign Secretary, have made 71 appearances in Parliament, responding to parliamentary questions and in Select Committees.
On Gaza, the hon. Lady raised some serious issues. She will know—the Minister for Armed Forces was just at the Dispatch Box—that the Government take compliance with international humanitarian law extremely seriously. We monitor that with our partners. She will know that, as we can see from previous conflicts, the Israel Defence Forces also produces reports after the event. All of that is subject to a great deal of scrutiny, but I will certainly ensure that the Foreign Secretary has heard her concerns.
The hon. Lady talked about the Home Secretary. She will know—indeed, many Opposition Members have acknowledged—that the plan for ending small boat crossings and ensuring that we are speeding up processing in the Home Office is working. I think the latest figures show that the Home Secretary has sped up processing in his Department by 250%. She will know that crossings are down by substantial amounts—I think now just shy of 40%—and returns are up, which is all to be welcomed. That has been helped in great part by the new legislation that the Government have introduced. I am sorry that right hon. and hon. Members on the Opposition Benches have not been able to support that.
That brings me to the final topic that the hon. Lady raised. I will make the case that we are faithfuls on the Government side. We have been faithfuls in our obligations to the British public in strengthening our borders. We have brought forward legislation which the Opposition have voted against—over 70 times on one recent Bill.
We have been faithful to the British public in our promises. We have been faithful to them in delivering on their decision to leave the EU, for which we had a landmark anniversary this week. Whatever way people voted in that referendum, we stuck with that democratic result—we did not try to reverse it or campaign for a second referendum—and what the British people want to know is that we are on the right trajectory now. Since we left the EU, we have grown faster than many nations, including Germany, Italy and Japan. Our export services are up at a record high. For goods and services, we are rising through the global rankings—we are up a place since last year. We have overtaken France on manufacturing, and we have simplified tariffs on thousands of goods and removed hundreds of trade barriers.
We have been through tough times, but whether it is our plans to level up communities such as Teesside, which Labour Members seem to be objecting to, or maximising our new-found freedoms to control our destiny and our borders, or opening up more opportunities for the wealth of talent and creativity of our citizens, our plan for Britain is working. Britain is on the right course. We have been faithful to our promises to the British people. Labour has not, and it would turn us back on the EU, union reform, tax hikes and much more.
Further business will be announced in the usual way.
Last week was Neighbourhood Policing Week. I was able to join the local Aldridge and Brownhills neighbourhood teams out in the community. Will my right hon. Friend join me in thanking our local teams for all they do? Does she agree that central to neighbourhood policing is neighbourhood policing hubs? That is why I continue to campaign against the proposed closure of Aldridge police station—and with only a few months left of the west midlands police and crime commissioner role, there should be a moratorium on any closure.
We saw a softer side to the Leader of the House last week. “The Prime Minister is a great dad”, she loyally read out from No. 10’s script. “He gives a lot to charity”, she whispered. Then, right on cue, normal service resumed and she was thundering fury at the Scots for not voting Tory. She asked me a question that got quite a response in Scotland: “Why do you think us Tory ‘rotters’”—her word, not mine—“are so desperate to keep Scotland in the Union?” Why, indeed? It is generally though that Conservatives act in their own self-interest. Anyway, Scots have been totting up all the great things about being in the UK: the gift of Brexit making us poorer faster than even the worst forecasts predicted; 14 years of grinding, endless austerity; and a crippling debt burden of more than 100% of GDP, just for starters.
However, the Leader of the House is not alone in her desperation to keep Scotland lashed tight to Westminster. She will remember seeing a secret document presented to the Cabinet in July 2020 by her colleague the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. The existence of that document was revealed at the covid inquiry this week. Finalised at the height of the pandemic, it was entitled “The State of the Union” and was a blatant attempt by her Government to politicise the pandemic and undermine the Scottish Government when trust in Government messaging was crucial. It asked the Cabinet to endorse some sort of strategy, most details of which sadly are missing from the inquiry’s version. It required polling, research and data analysis, all at a time when Scotland’s First Minister and Government were focused on and doing their damnedest to protect the people of Scotland.
No. 10 was slithering from one scandal to another. We know that a Union strategy committee and a Union operations committee were set up to mimic the strategy and operations committees that helped create the monster of Brexit. The right hon. Lady will agree that considerable resources were required, diverting cash and personnel from fighting the pandemic. It must be made clear to the public who funded that. Will she ask her colleagues to give a statement on the project, laying out why it was an appropriate use of governmental resources, what it did and what it is felt to have achieved—its key performance indicators, let us say—particularly given the times in which it was conceived? Finally, the Leader of the House will recall that the state of the Union report found, among many things, that 82% of young voters in Scotland want independence. Is she surprised?
Only the hon. Lady could come to this House and raise the issue of the covid inquiry this week. Perhaps she should have spent a little more time watching the evidence delivered by her own First Minister. We are having a covid inquiry and we did a lessons learned exercise because we want to ensure that this nation can be resilient in future and we want to learn the lessons. The hon. Lady’s party has been less than forthcoming on a similar ambition for its performance in Scotland. I would ask her to reflect on that. The only thing missing from the hon. Lady’s question is that she has somehow failed to accuse the UK Government of being responsible for an escaped macaque from the Highland zoo.
I thank the Leader of the House for announcing next week’s business and the Backbench Business debates next Thursday. If we are allocated time on the first Thursday back following the February recess, we will have two debates: on the civil nuclear road map, and on premature deaths from heart and circulatory diseases.
The Committee is very much open for applications, particularly for Westminster Hall debates. Every week, many Members are unsuccessful in ballots for Westminster Hall debates. Some of those who are unsuccessful might think about coming along and applying to the Backbench Business Committee; it is another route. More time is available in Westminster Hall than in the Chamber, which is heavily subscribed to, but we still very much welcome applications for Chamber debates.
I also note the change of business at short notice today. I fundamentally understand the reasons for that, but hope that the Leader of the House will be kind to the Backbench Business Committee in allocating time in future weeks.
I will raise one last matter, speaking for myself. The former Kwik Save supermarket building in Felling, Gateshead, has been lying empty and in disrepair for more than a decade. The owner is resisting all legal attempts by the council to facilitate its demolition. Unfortunately, it has now become a magnet for antisocial behaviour, and local residents are regularly pelted with debris from the site. The owner has used the courts and legal processes to frustrate the council in expediting this much-needed demolition. Can the Leader of the House guide me on how to get this problem sorted out? The owner is causing a blight on many people’s lives in that locality.
The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities is focused on precisely the type of situation that the hon. Gentleman describes, and on similar situations in which the landlord, although not an obstacle to development, does not have the capacity to make repairs to the building, and other third-party developers do not wish to buy a building in that condition. He is looking at what bridging finance could be made available to facilitate matters, and has also brought forward the notion of community auctions. I will write to the Secretary of State to ensure that he has heard of the hon. Gentleman’s interest in the issue, and will ask his officials to afford the hon. Gentleman some advice.
Cedars roundabout on the edge of Barnstaple is subject to 20 weeks of roadworks, which are supposed to help with congestion. The first week saw up to two hours of delays for students and teachers getting to school and businesses losing huge amounts of trade, with staff also arriving late. The scheme has gone ahead with local councillors’ support, but without adequate traffic management or modelling, either on the site or across the rest of Barnstaple, which has been blighted by road delays for decades. While this is clearly a local issue, can the Leader of the House guide me towards any Government assistance or national schemes that could enable someone to come and help with the road traffic modelling? The fear is that given how bad the traffic management has been to date, even when the scheme is completed, it will barely help the congestion in the way that it should.
On 12 January last year, I asked the Leader of the House how I could pursue my search for a way of putting bereaved children in touch with charities that want to help them, so that the charities know where the children are and can offer them support. It seemed to me a simple matter to come up with a protocol, but since then we have had two debates, I have met two Ministers, and a petition has been presented to 10 Downing Street by bereaved children who want something to be done for others, so that others do not suffer in the way that they did. Many of us who have been through that kind of grief want to see progress. Both the Ministers with whom I discussed the issue were schools Ministers; they talked about the work being done in schools, which is very supportive, and no one has any criticism of it. At the end of both meetings, however, the Ministers said, “Actually, we think that you need to speak to the Home Office”, which is where everything grinds to a halt. We do not seem to be able to make progress and obtain clarity, although what we want is quite simple. It is not a new law, but merely a change in practice. Can the Leader of the House advise me on how we can get clarity and move forward, and perhaps secure that meeting with the Home Office?
I have been in regular communication with the relevant authorities about the Meriden estate in Watford, and I brought many of them together just last year to look at the issues that residents have raised with me. One pressing issue is the dangerous and illegal parking that is happening outside the new parade of shops. Although work is being done, I am sharing the residents’ concerns, which I also have, that this dangerous parking remains a serious accident waiting to happen. Will my right hon. Friend guide me on how I can press the various authorities for more urgency in finding a solution and remind those parking illegally that they are putting people’s lives at risk on York Way?
[That this House notes the announcement of Steven Davis to retire from playing professional football; acknowledges the outstanding achievements of Steven, who at 39 years old holds the UK men’s international caps record with 140 appearances for Northern Ireland as well as 742 club appearances for top flight clubs in England and Scotland, having played for his beloved Glasgow Rangers in two separate spells using the term, it’s such a special football club, in his retirement statement; and wishes him and his family every blessing and good wish as he decides on his post playing career.]
Leigh Heath Court is a low-rise block of 42 flats in my constituency that had cladding installed as part of the Government’s green deal policy. However, following the tragic events at Grenfell, the insurance premiums there have gone from £20,000 to more than £100,000. Sadly, because Leigh Heath Court is under 11 metres tall it does not qualify for Government support to remove the cladding, and the Association of British Insurers has repeatedly failed to deliver a long-promised alternative scheme. I have been raising this matter with Ministers for nearly two years now. Please may we have a statement on what the Government are doing to press the ABI to launch this long-promised scheme?
Yesterday, the Post Office confirmed that the Clapham Common branch in my constituency will be closed permanently next month, despite the serious impact that that will have on elderly and vulnerable residents. Not only did the public consultation receive more than 1,000 responses, but there has also been a high-profile campaign against the closure and a petition was handed into Downing Street just yesterday. The Post Office promised to take that feedback seriously, but, despite community opposition, it has not made a single change to its plans after the consultation. Does the Leader of the House agree that public consultation should never be a meaningless tick-box exercise? May we have a debate in Government time to ensure that communities can influence these really important decisions?
I have the great honour to represent a large number of fishermen who operate under-10 metre fishing vessels out of the harbours of Mevagissey, Newquay and Fowey. Those vessels play an important role in providing high-quality fish for the UK and for export in the most sustainable way. They are an important part of the local economy and of the social and cultural fabric of their coastal communities. Those fishermen often feel overlooked when the Government are setting fisheries policy, and they are adversely impacted at the moment by the decision to remove quota for pollock. Can we have a ministerial statement on the Government’s policy on the under-10 metre fishing fleet and the steps they are taking to support that fleet to ensure that it has a viable and sustainable future?
Families on Campton Fields estate in my constituency, like so many others across the country, have been left exposed to fleecehold by the Government’s failure to act to end the ongoing limbo on estate adoption. The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill contains many good measures, but it does not act on the Competition and Markets Authority’s recommendation to tackle the issue of estate adoption at source. With cross-party representations now being made on the issue, will the Housing Minister make a statement on when the Government will tackle it once and for all?
Members will be familiar with the various drop-in sessions held in the House, particularly those organised by campaign groups and charities connected with the health sector. A common theme is early diagnosis, but, disturbingly, statistics sometimes show that treatment is not common across the country and perhaps there may not be the best outcomes in one’s own constituency. May we have a debate in Government time to look at how we can improve treatments across the country?
I have a very serious question for the Leader of the House. It is extremely worrying that a Member of Parliament is standing down because of the pressure that is being put on him. There is increasing pressure on Members of Parliament. I raised worries and concerns about my own case recently. It will be a terrible thing if people are afraid to offer themselves for public office and to stand for Parliament. We need not just to have a debate, but to do something in the House about how we give better support. We want people to get up in the morning and be keen to come to work. When I raised my problems, I did not get much help or support from the House, or even from my own party. We need to do better if we are to keep this a healthy parliamentary democracy.
Last year, I initiated the largest ever survey of Members to make sure that this House is responding to the concerns that they have for the world as it is now, not as it was 20 years ago. We must continue to do that. I hope that the House authorities will meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss his experiences and how we can support hon. Members to ensure that they are able to do their job. We can all help with this, and the public can help with it too. We know that what often encourages people is when they feel that they are given permission by others to demonise and dehumanise Members of Parliament, and quite often that permission to do serious physical harm and the motivation for it start on social media. Whatever we think about a particular person’s political persuasion, their views or their voting record, they are in this place at the service of the people who sent them here. That deserves respect and it deserves our protection, too.
Food waste is bad for the environment and bad for the economy, which is why the work of food redistribution charities, such as FareShare, is essential. At a time when people are struggling with the cost of living, the redistribution network is vital. We should look at how we can improve it and invest in it. Although the Government are making good progress in reducing food waste along the supply chain, there is still much more that can be done. Even in this House, I am always concerned about how much food we throw away. Will my right hon. Friend make parliamentary time available to discuss the issue of food waste in the UK?
A very experienced MP once said to me that the letters “MP” stand for “must persist”, so I will persist and ask the Leader of the House whether she will help me to get a statement from the Paymaster General about the infected blood inquiry, in relation to the statement by Sir Brian last month about the delay in the publication of his final report. I know that work has been going on, so will the Paymaster General update the House, and will the Leader of the House reassure me that the House will hear from the Government on 20 May, the day of the publication of Sir Brian’s final report, and not within the 25 sitting days that have been talked about? That would mean that the Government could take until 3 July to respond, which is not acceptable.
Tens of thousands of pounds—that is the bill that has landed at the door of a number of my constituents, and according to a BBC report the constituents of right hon. and hon. Members across the north of England. The bills relate to cavity wall insulation that residents had installed using a Government grant. That cavity wall insulation was defective, and caused damp, mould and damage to property. When no win, no fee lawyers got in touch, residents took up the offer. That proceeded through the courts. They were told that they would not have to pay, but a law firm based in Sheffield, SSB Law, has now collapsed. There was no insurance policy for residents, and they have now been hit with legal costs because of its collapse. I understand that the Solicitors Regulation Authority did a forensic investigation last year and is now investigating again, but can I enlist the help of the Leader of the House to get justice for residents who have no means to pay the tens of thousands of pounds that they are being asked for, when they thought that they were doing the right thing in getting cavity wall insulation, and putting it right after it went wrong?
The Leader of the House will be aware of the wonderful gospel singer Harmonie London, who regularly performs on the streets of London, principally on Oxford Street. During a recent performance there, Community Support Officer AW5152 accosted the performer, and said, “You’re not allowed to perform church songs outside of church grounds unless you have a special letter.” The Leader of the House will know that under article 9 our rights to freedom of religious worship are enshrined in law and protected. That officer was simply wrong, but when that was pointed out to her, her response was to stick her tongue out at the performer. That was just wrong. This performer, unfortunately, has been accosted more than once by police officers about her performance. She is entitled to sing gospel songs on the streets of our nation, as many buskers do, and those freedoms should be protected. I hope the police, after apologising, will train their officers to be aware of the rights of all the citizens of this United Kingdom.
Over the last few weeks, this House has seen a rise in absenteeism among senior Ministers. There has been a debate on steel with no Secretary of State and nothing from the Education Secretary on the childcare crisis. Does the Leader of the House agree that that is an unacceptable way for her colleagues to treat this House?
Ynys Môn is represented by five Members of the Senedd, soon to increase to six, and is merging with another constituency. That could result in not one MS living on Ynys Môn. Conversely, the UK Government have recognised Ynys Môn’s unique island character by granting the island special protected status. Does the Leader of the House agree that the Welsh Labour Government, propped up by Plaid, should prioritise increasing the number of GP and dentist appointments, not increasing the number of MSs by a staggering 60%, from 60 to 96?
Earlier this week we saw the publication of the long-delayed Teesworks report, which made no fewer than 28 recommendations to address poor practice by the Tees Tory Mayor in everything from governance and transparency to failure to provide his own board with the necessary information to make decisions, to the lack of scrutiny over value for public money. Does the Leader of the House agree that that was sufficient reason to call in the National Audit Office, even before the latest Private Eye revelations that £20 million was paid by the Mayor’s development corporation to the organisation controlled by two local businessmen to move rubble from one part of the site to another, without any contract?
Labour is focused on Teesside—the last few months have been the first time for that, really. For many, many years, when Labour had the opportunity to directly help that part of the country, they ignored it, so the people of Teesside—fed up with Labour inaction—put their trust in Mayor Houchen. He has a plan and he is delivering: he saved the airport; he secured the first and largest freeport, which has already secured billions of pounds of inward investment; the Teesworks site has already been made ready for redevelopment and investment, ahead of schedule and ahead of budget; £650 million of investment is securing thousands of green jobs; the SeAH factory is being built using British steel, which makes me very proud; and the world’s first carbon capture, utilisation and storage facility has secured billions of additional funding into the area.
Mayor Houchen has managed to secure £200 million to invest in local rail, and he has a new bypass on the way; he has increased the employment rate by 3% above the national average; and he has future business rates revenues, which are projected to be about £1.4 billion to date. He gets on and delivers. Labour ought to be taking notes, rather than smearing him and the hard-working people of Teesside who are making this plan happen. That tells me that Labour has learned absolutely nothing; it has not changed and shows every sign of taking the people of Teesside for granted.
Taxi drivers are essential key workers who get youngsters to school and the elderly to health services and support our night-time economy. But I have spoken to taxi drivers in Stockton South, and they say that they are increasingly victims of assault and fare dodgers, and they feel that no one has their back. Will my right hon. Friend grant me a debate on how we can better protect taxi drivers and ensure that those responsible feel the full force of the law?
Last week, the International Court of Justice ruled that claims of genocide in Gaza are plausible. Two days later, during a settler conference in Jerusalem alongside 10 other Government Ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Israeli Minister of National Security, stated that encouraging emigration from Gaza is a necessity. I am sure that many colleagues across the House would agree that that sounds dangerously like an advocation of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza, so will the Leader of the House find time for a debate in Government time so that this House may express its views on whether it is now appropriate to issue targeted sanctions against any individual, organisation or state that is found to have incited or committed war crimes, or incited ethnic cleansing or genocide?
I urge all right hon. and hon. Members to think about what they say on the Floor of the House and whether it helps or hinders that situation. This Chamber is not an international court; accusations about genocide or ethnic cleansing should not be made. It is about ensuring that the right bodies are overseeing matters. I am sure that if the hon. Gentleman asked for a briefing on how the Government are doing that, whether through our partnerships in the Ministry of Defence or at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, he would be very reassured by the oversight that is being provided.
“To operate as NHS cancer centres, the Rutherford sites need to meet NHS specifications and we are advised by NHS England that they do not.”
The reality is that other Rutherford cancer units, in Taunton and in Clatterbridge in Liverpool, have joint partnerships with the NHS. The Rutherford centre in Bomarsund has had referrals from the NHS, so this is absolute humbug. Will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on fairness and equity in the frequency of diagnostics, cancer treatment and so on across the country, not forgetting the north-east of England?
Food is not a luxury: it is essential for human existence. Food price inflation is running at 10%, which is putting pressure on household budgets. Across Europe, farmers are leading protests that have been barely reported in our media. The phrase “No farmers, no food” has been translated and is understood in many languages. Can we have an urgent debate in Government time on UK farming, UK food production and UK food security, before our farmers start taking direct action?
In his question, the hon. Gentleman has highlighted the fact that there is an enormous amount of scrutiny—of contracts, of value for money and of everything that has gone on. That is what the report and the other investigations and oversight have achieved. I say to the Labour party that it should stop knocking success, stop knocking this plan that is working, and start taking some notes.
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.