PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Business of the House - 6 March 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)
Debate Detail
Monday 10 March—Second Reading of the Crime and Policing Bill.
Tuesday 11 March—Remaining stages of the Employment Rights Bill, day one.
Wednesday 12 March—Remaining stages of the Employment Rights Bill, day two.
Thursday 13 March—General debate on the future of farming, followed by a general debate on mental health support in educational settings. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 14 March—Private Members’ Bills.
The provisional business for the week commencing 17 March will include:
Monday 17 March—Remaining stages of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, day one.
Tuesday 18 March—Remaining stages of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, day two.
Wednesday 19 March—Consideration of Lords amendments to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill, followed by Opposition day, first allotted day, second part: debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition, subject to be announced.
Thursday 20 March—General debate on knife crime among children and young people, followed by a general debate on coastal communities. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 21 March—The House will not be sitting.
We join all colleagues in celebration of International Women’s Day this Saturday. I am sure the whole House will also share my deep concern at the latest news in relation to Ukraine and will wish to send all of our best wishes to the Prime Minister and other European leaders in doing everything they can to support that country.
It is now three months or so since I became shadow Leader of the House, and I am sad to say that these joyous Thursday morning sessions seem to have fallen into a little bit of a rut. [Interruption.] “No, no!”, I hear you cry, “Business questions are still as fresh, lively and engaging as they ever were, if not more so,” but sadly I fear that is not true. It is our function on the Opposition Benches to press public concerns and raise questions about the Government—indeed, as His Majesty’s loyal Opposition, it is not only our function, but our constitutional duty to do so. It is the Government’s job to respond to those questions and concerns and, in so doing, to make the case publicly for the policy choices and decisions they have made and to say whether they have an underlying strategy.
Unfortunately, as you will have noticed, Mr Speaker, the Government are not doing that in our sessions. In fact, the Leader of the House rarely, if ever, responds to the important public questions and concerns that I raise. Instead, I am sorry to say that we get the same endlessly reheated mishmash of standard party political lines, personal jibes and irrelevant comment.
Hon. Members will recall that I first raised this issue at business questions on 5 December, when I highlighted a series of occasions on which the Leader had been unwilling to answer or even address some obvious examples of Government economic incompetence. As I pointed out:
“Many different responses were open to her. She could have said, ‘I agree with you.’” —[Official Report, 5 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 458.]
She could have said, “The shadow Leader is wrong for the following reasons,” or even, “I don’t know.” If she did not want to respond at that time, she could have said, as so many other Ministers do, “I will look into it,” “I will reply to you,” or, “I will ask a colleague to investigate and respond”. We just heard the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster say those things.
In fact, on none of those occasions did the Leader of the House bother to give any kind of proper answer at all. Instead, her approach was to change the subject and attack the previous Government, rather than to defend the record of her own Government—which is, after all, the whole point of these exchanges. More troubling still is that she herself has so often called for transparency from Ministers, and that a failure to be accountable is itself a breach of the rules of this House, of the Nolan principles and of the ministerial code of conduct.
I wish I could report that anything has changed since December. If anything, however, I am afraid that matters have got worse. A recent low point was at business questions on 13 February, when I raised five important issues relating to the Government’s approach to the rule of law, including the potential clash between domestic and international law, the level of risk that the Government sought to take and their attitude towards judicial review. I am sorry to say that the Leader of the House did not bother to respond to any of those questions: instead, we had yet another series of irrelevant political attacks.
We need a better way to track and monitor those evasions, so, in the spirit of openness and transparency, I propose a new approach, which we can call “Leader’s bingo”. Colleagues get a point every time the Leader of the House blames the previous Government, attacks Members of the Opposition, changes the subject or uses the words “gently remind”, “take no lectures” or similar in her response. I would not for one second suggest that colleagues shout “Bingo!” in the Chamber, but there may be other ways in which they can indicate when they have filled their card.
That is a light-hearted suggestion, but it has a serious purpose. I know how strongly you, Mr Speaker, feel about the importance of parliamentary accountability, transparency and the proper scrutiny of Government decisions. I ask the Leader of the House again if she will reaffirm her commitment to those values and engage properly with the questions I ask in the future.
I also wish peace and blessings to those observing Ramadan and those marking Lent. Today is also World Book Day, a day to celebrate our favourite books and authors—and, I have to say, every working parent’s worst nightmare, because of having to find a last-minute costume. I see that the shadow Leader of the House has come as his favourite author: himself. For those who have not read the thrilling historical novel, “The Winding Stair”, it is still available in all good bookshops. He can give me some royalties later.
Saturday marks International Women’s Day. I thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing us to come together in this Chamber and take a historic photograph to mark the most female MPs ever being elected to this House. It is a reminder that the gender pay gap in this country is still 13.1%, and women work for free on average seven weeks a year—although perhaps the shadow Leader of the House is working for free most of the time.
I thank the shadow Leader of the House for his comments on Ukraine. It has been really important to this country’s international role and in supporting the Prime Minister that the House of Commons has once again shown such unity, and such backing for Ukraine and for the Prime Minister’s leadership in recent weeks. As the shadow Leader of the House knows, we are focused on making sure that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position to achieve long-term, lasting peace through strength. As we have done in recent weeks, we will make sure that the House is kept constantly updated on these matters.
That was kind of where it ended today, Mr Speaker. The shadow Leader of the House has again used his slot to ask me not a single question. He says that I have not given him any answers in any of the weeks that we have been standing at the Dispatch Box, but if he really wants me to tell him again today where he has gone wrong, I am happy to give him some advice. I am happy to tell him that yes, his Government did get many things wrong, and we are getting many things right. If the shadow Leader of the House wants to play business questions bingo, perhaps we can start by saying “Bingo!” every time he actually asks me a question, because we did not hear much of that today.
There are lots of people in the Chamber for business questions today, so I will not detain the House for much longer, but I notice that the shadow Leader of the House did not ask me about some of the really good things that the Government have been doing here at home, as well as abroad. As there are a lot of people here today, I remind the House that we have confirmed the first 750 schools that will receive free breakfast clubs, because we do not want any child to start school hungry. We are ending the 8 am scramble in our GP surgeries, with more appointments and better access. We have launched our fantastic commonhold White Paper, which is another step towards finally ending the feudal leasehold system, and we are dealing with the courts backlog that the shadow Leader of the House’s Government left us with—another shameful reminder of their shocking record on criminal justice. We have also announced our plan for neighbourhoods, with another £1.5 billion to help restore pride in our communities. That is on top of the additional amendments to our Employment Rights Bill.
Unlike the shadow Leader of the House’s vacuous contribution today, this Government are getting on with delivering for the country, whether at home or abroad.
At Prime Minister’s questions on 8 January, I raised the plight of community pharmacies. They are struggling to stay afloat due to the unfair terms of their NHS contracts, which often mean that they have to buy drugs that they dispense for more than the NHS reimburses them. The Prime Minister asked me to follow up with more details, which I did that afternoon. Despite chasing, I am yet to receive a reply from the Department of Health and Social Care, to which my inquiry was passed.
Community pharmacies cannot wait. The National Pharmacy Association projects that nearly 1,000 pharmacies will close by the end of 2027. There is no guaranteed funding for Pharmacy First beyond the end of this month. This is a critical issue that the Government need to address urgently. I know that the Leader of the House takes seriously the timeliness of replies from Ministers and Departments, so will she let the House know what further steps she is taking to ensure that issues such as protecting our vital community pharmacies are given the swift and full attention they deserve?
The hon. Member has raised the issue of community pharmacies with me on a number of occasions, and rightly so. They are a vital part of our national health service, and they have been left on their knees, with many closing in recent years. We are turning that around, because getting services back into communities via pharmacies and other means is critical to delivering our health mission. I will ensure she gets a reply.
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, if we are given Thursday 27 March, there will be a debate on St Patrick’s day and Northern Irish affairs, followed by a debate on the 10th anniversary of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. We now have a queue of debates for the Chamber that will last until the summer recess. We will be grateful for every Thursday and any time that can be given, particularly if the House is going to rise early on Government business.
In addition, the business in Westminster Hall on Tuesday 11 March will include a debate on the governance of English rugby union. On Thursday 13 March, there will be a debate on educational opportunities for young carers. On Tuesday 18 March—with your agreement, Mr Speaker—there will be a debate on free school meals. On Thursday 20 March, there will be a debate on British Sign Language Week and Government support for the tourism industry. On Tuesday 25 March, there will be a debate on the retrospective accountability of the construction industry. On Thursday 27 March, there will be a debate on the prevention of drugs deaths, followed by a debate on the first anniversary of the Hughes report on valproate and pelvic mesh.
Yesterday, the External Affairs Minister from India, Shri Jaishankar, was attacked when he was leaving a public venue where he had been addressing an audience of Indian people in this country. He was attacked by Khalistani thugs. That is against the Geneva convention, and it appears that the police and the security forces failed to ensure that he was made safe. That is an affront to democracy, and an affront to our friends and allies in India. We need to make sure that does not happen again. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Home Secretary or an appropriate Minister makes a statement to the House about what protection we will have to ensure that visitors to this country are safe?
I am very sorry to hear about what sounded like a serious attack on a visitor to this country from the Indian Parliament. That is unacceptable and not the way in which we want our visitors to be treated, and I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman receives a full response from the Home Secretary.
My constituent Chris is among many people affected by the loan charge, which applies to “disguised remuneration” schemes. While everyone should pay their fair share of tax, many, like Chris, used these schemes in good faith when they were legal and now face retrospective penalties. The Government’s long-awaited review is a welcome step, but Chris and many others who have been affected feel that its scope is too limited. They believe that it fails to examine how we got here, its implementation, or those who promoted and mis-sold these schemes. Will the Leader of the House allocate time for a full debate on the loan charge and its consequences?
In 2017, Jagtar Singh Johal, a British national from Dumbarton, was arrested in India just weeks after his wedding. He has been tortured, threatened to be burnt alive, and in arbitrary detention for seven years and four months. This week Jagtar was acquitted in the first case to come to court, as there was no credible evidence, and his lawyer has asked for all charges to be dropped because there is no new evidence. Many in the Sikh community, including my constituents, welcome this development, as well as the Government’s commitment to securing Jagtar’s release and return. Given the Prime Minister’s and the Foreign Secretary’s meetings in the last 48 hours with the Indian Foreign Minister, will the Leader of the House provide time for an update on what steps are being taken to bring this British national—one of our own—home?
“On April 1 last year I had a fall on Highgate Golf Course which resulted in a complex break of my right leg. Friends phoned for an ambulance but were told that an ambulance would not come for this type of emergency…On a cold spring day, I was left lying in an isolated spot on the wet ground, unable to move and in great pain, with very limited options about getting to hospital.”
Could we have a debate about the response of ambulances in such serious situations, so that my constituents do not have to go through something like that again?
While we are talking about young people, Emily Rizk from Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group was recently honoured with the project excellence award at the Association of Colleges’ student of the year awards. Will the Leader of the House join me and my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) in celebrating Emily’s amazing work?
Last month I found myself in somewhat rare agreement with the Chancellor when she challenged Britain’s regulators to create a regulatory environment that unlocks innovation and investment. Our media is one the sectors in which we have seen really good growth over the past few years, with huge diversification right across the sector, but there is a concern about the attitude of regulators, which might undermine that growth potential.
I think specifically of cases highlighted recently in an opinion piece by my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), in which Ofcom fined GB News 10 times more for doing a question time event with the Conservative party leader than it fined another channel for broadcasting antisemitic tropes. I worry that that attitude towards policing the media, which seems to focus more on politics than prejudice, may act as a barrier to others coming into the sector. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate on the media sector, the role of regulation and freedom in our sector?
Given that Ministry of Justice officials attend the Sentencing Council, either the Lord Chancellor knew of the policy or she was asleep at the wheel. For the record, the Lord Chancellor’s predecessor, Alex Chalk, has described this as ridiculous. The Leader of the House failed to give a response to my hon. Friend the Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans), so will she find time for a debate on the Sentencing Council?
Last Friday, the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme received the news that the cowboy operators of Walleys quarry landfill had gone into liquidation. That is an attempt to cut and run from cleaning up the disgraceful mess that they have caused for far too long. Will the Leader of the House find time for us to unpick the crisis facing the waste sector in England, to identify how we can ensure that those who cause harm are held to account and made to pay for their failures, and to discuss how we can deliver justice and answers for the good people of Newcastle-under-Lyme?
“amend this section so as to provide for caste to be an aspect of race”.
However, five years later the Government announced that they would not implement that legislation, arguing that caste discrimination can be discrimination based on ethnic origins. Does the Leader of the House agree that caste discrimination is as bad as discrimination based on colour, nationality, or ethnic or national origins, and will she agree to a debate in the House on the implementation of section 9(5) of the Equality Act, so that caste discrimination is specified as a form of race discrimination?
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.