Bob Blackman
MP for Harrow East · Conservative · United Kingdom
“I hope that the Leader of the House will again provide protected time and prevail on his colleagues not to have too many Government statements, so that we can have a reasonable debate on the subject.”
“Since the changes, we have been inundated with requests from Select Committees to have statements in the House, which I welcome. Next Tuesday, before the two debates that have been scheduled, there will be Select Committee statements on the Treasury and Public Accounts Committee reports.”
“On Tuesday 20 October there will be a debate on manufacturing skills. On Thursday 22 October there will be a debate on compensation for Equitable Life policyholders. I am sure that the whole House will recognise the importance of hospital radio across the country.”
“Many of my constituents work at Heathrow airport. They have had to work extra hours, as the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) mentioned, and they have suffered abuse, too. I put on record my appreciation for all that they have done. Even more of my constituents use Heathrow for business travel and social travel.”
“I am sure that the Leader of the House will join me in congratulating Radio Brockley on this wonderful anniversary. Perhaps we could have a statement in Government time on the importance of hospital radio in the health service and the benefits it brings to patients and staff.”
“This is a sad day for the UK-Israel relationship, given the risks of what the Foreign Secretary is doing. Affecting the Israeli elections by making even moderate politicians even more hawkish is a huge risk.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,702 lines we hold for Bob Blackman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 115.
“In closing, I thank the Leader of the House for listening to what we had to say, for acting on it, as we asked him to do, and for bringing forward these motions, albeit literally at the last minute before Prorogation. The changes are welcome none the less.”
“I welcome the Procedure Committee changing the rules on how lobbying and the process of elections for Select Committee Chairmen take place at the beginning of a Parliament. We are all used to fighting each other in the election, then suddenly arriving back in Parliament and being greeted as long-lost friends when somebody is standing to be elected as a Select Committee Chairman. That is reasonable, but what has not been reasonable is the deluge of papers and other lobbying that has taken place—particularly through the use of the email system—on behalf of candidates. I think that most of us got fed up with that a long time ago, so this is a very sensible reform.”
“I have written to the Leader of the House with a list of debates that Members want to debate, so I hope he can choose from some of those to make sure that the will of Back Benchers is heard and that those who have been waiting for some time get an opportunity. The Backbench Business Committee is being brought in line with other Select Committees, so the Chairman and the Committee will be elected at the beginning of a Parliament and serve the duration of that Parliament, unless the parties decide to remove members of the Committee. The Chairman will serve for the duration of the Parliament, which is once again a sensible and good move. Of course, I hope that Members will see the wisdom of re-electing me as Chairman of the Backbench Business Committee when we return after the state opening of Parliament, but that is for another day.”
“Requests for Select Committee statements come to the Backbench Business Committee on a regular basis. Because of pressure on Chamber time, we have had to push some of them into Westminster Hall, which limits the amount of time given to debates in Westminster Hall. The changes will give the Committee flexibility on when it allocates Select Committee statements in the House, and I think that will be to the benefit of all Select Committees. It is something we recommended, and I warmly welcome it. The other issue is the election of the Committee. In the next Session, it is likely that there will be at least one day, and possibly more days, when the Government will have to put on general debates in the Chamber that have not been committed by the Backbench Business Committee, because we will not have been reconstituted in time.”
“I thank all members of the Backbench Business Committee for the excellent work they have done over the last year and a half in bringing forward debates and ensuring that Members of all parties get the opportunity to debate the issues that they want to debate, rather than what the Government want to debate. We know that that can sometimes be embarrassing for the Government, but it is the will of the Committee. It has been a pleasure to oversee that work. We have made reforms so that Members who come in front of our Committee now face questioning from all members of the Committee—not just one or two, which was the case in previous years. That has been an important reform. I will point out the consequences of the changes that the Leader of the House is putting forward.”
“Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. The Minister is working diligently to produce all those documents. Will he ensure that they are provided before Parliament is prorogued at the end of the Session?”
“The recent arrests of individuals that have taken place are welcome, but Jewish people will be thinking twice about whether they should go to synagogue this weekend and whether they will be safe. It is imperative that the Government not only take measures to reassure Jewish people in this country, but take prompt action. The individuals perpetrating these evil attacks are controlled by Iranians; it is often Iranian diplomats or other third parties who are directing these operations. We must put a stop to what is going on in radicalising our young people and using them as stooges for the Iranian regime. Will the Leader of the House encourage the Security Minister to take prompt action to round up the individuals instructing these evil people so that Jewish people can feel safe once again in this country?”
“We have debates for the Chamber until the Christmas recess; for Tuesday mornings in Westminster Hall until the November recess; and for Thursdays in Westminster Hall until the conference recess. If the Leader of the House wants to have any general debates before the Committee is reconstituted following state opening, there is a long list of them. I thank him for laying the Standing Orders, but when will they be considered by the House? I pay tribute to the members of the Backbench Business Committee, the Clerks and the other support services, who have done such a brilliant job assisting us in formulating the debates that we have had. There have been recent attacks on Jewish communities across north London.”
“I begin by paying tribute to the late Brian Jones, who died overnight, aged 89, at Northwick Park hospital. Brian was either president or chairman of the Harrow East Conservative Association for 25 years, and he was also my election agent for three general elections. He was a distinguished civil servant who worked on international trade matters before he retired, and he was the district scout commissioner in Harrow. He will be sorely missed, and we obviously express our sadness to his relatives and friends. I suspect that these will be the last business questions before Prorogation. As is usual at the end of a Session, I shall write to the Leader of the House, on behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, with a list of debates that are still on our waiting list.”
“Other regulators exist, but none has comprehensive responsibility for the support element of exempt accommodation. Guidance such as the national statement of expectations sets out a vision, but it is not legally enforceable. Voluntary standards exist in some areas, but compliance is optional. In short, the system has allowed far too many providers to slip through the cracks.”
“While I remember visiting cities such as Birmingham where the issues with supported housing have been most prominent, Crisis and other organisations have identified similar patterns across London, the midlands, the south-east and beyond. Rogue providers are expanding, exploiting inconsistencies in oversight between local authorities and adapting their business models to stay one step ahead of enforcement. Local authorities are responsible for assessing eligibility for housing benefit and verifying that support is being provided, but as Crisis has highlighted, they face significant barriers of limited resources, inconsistent powers and legal constraints. There is also evidence that some councils struggle to proactively verify whether meaningful support is being delivered at all.”
“Some have even been forced back into homelessness to escape these conditions. Others have been charged additional fees for support that does not exist—charges that eat into their already limited incomes and push them further into poverty. Heaven help those vulnerable people if they dare to get a job, because the reduction in housing support means that, in most cases, the rogue landlord kicks them out. These findings are echoed in wider evidence from the sector, including the collapse of providers such as Prospect Housing, where residents were charged for inadequate or absent support. To be absolutely clear, this is not an isolated problem.”
“That is because exempt accommodation allows providers to charge higher rents through housing benefit, recognising that supporting vulnerable people comes with additional costs. The fundamental flaw, as Crisis has highlighted, is that there has been no consistent, enforceable mechanism to ensure that the support justifying those higher rents is delivered, and there is no single regulator responsible for overseeing that support. The result is that in some cases, we are rewarding exploitation. We have heard deeply troubling accounts from residents. Crisis has reported people being forced to share basic facilities with literally dozens of others, living in properties that are plagued by damp, mould and vermin, and experiencing intimidation and abuse—I have spoken to tenants who were abused and forced to move from one property to another.”
“However, when it fails and rogue landlords take control, we have seen individuals punished for daring to get a job, because if they do so, they lose their housing benefit and the landlord cannot charge the earth in rent. Those rogue landlords refuse to provide even basic support and, as I have said, they sometimes house people literally next door to the very people they are fleeing. Over recent years, we have seen the rise of rogue operators in the exempt accommodation sector. Crisis has documented how those providers exploit gaps in regulation, particularly in non-commissioned accommodation, where oversight is at its weakest. They have entered the market not to deliver support, but to maximise profit.”
“See you next week.” That is the extent of the support that these people receive. As Crisis has set out, when it is delivered well, supported housing can provide high-quality transitional homes that help people to move on from homelessness and rebuild their independence. Emmaus UK’s recent “Rebuilding Lives” report reinforces this, showing how good supported housing not only offers shelter, but provides purpose and opportunities for training and work, which are key ingredients in helping people to regain stability and confidence. When it works well, supported housing is transformative. It provides a pathway to independence and access to employment, it helps people to rebuild relationships and move on to settled homes, and it saves the public purse billions by reducing demand on health, criminal justice and emergency services.”
“The need for action is urgent and immediate, because while we continue to talk about the issue, rogue landlords continue to operate. While we delay, vulnerable people continue to suffer and public money continues to flow into the hands of those who exploit those in need, rather than support them. Supported housing should be one of the great strengths of our social system. It provides accommodation alongside care, support and supervision for people who are literally rebuilding their lives. Let us not forget that these people may have experienced homelessness, may have fled domestic abuse, or may be living with complex needs. The good charities assess those people’s needs just after providing a roof over their heads and supply a network of support; the rogue landlords pop along once a week and say, “Everyone all right? Yes?”
“I worked with charities such as Crisis, and the Act was born out of necessity, with mounting evidence in too many cases that supported housing was failing the very people it was meant to help and that rogue landlords were getting away without proper regulation. I think it is fair to say that I have been patient, given that the Act was passed in 2023 and, in 2026, it still has not been brought into operation. I know that the Government have consulted on it, and I welcome the fact that they continue to commit to implementing it, as they set out in their recent response to the consultation, but the time for consultation and delay must now be over. We have to get on with this, because every single day, vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords.”
“These houses could have housed someone who had been a drug addict next door to a drug pusher, and a lady fleeing domestic violence next door to someone convicted of domestic violence. There was no regulation at all. To be fair to it, Birmingham city council had introduced a voluntary scheme, but unfortunately the rogue landlords were the ones who would not register. Before I go on, it is very important that I pay tribute to the wonderful charities up and down the country that provide not only a home, but support for vulnerable people. Having been drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot in 2022, I took the step of introducing what is now the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. This House and the other place took vital steps when they supported the Act.”
“It was built on the very simple but powerful principle that early intervention, dignity and support can change lives. To date, my Act has prevented 1.6 million people from becoming homeless. In 2022, the Committee undertook an inquiry, at the behest of several Birmingham MPs, into what can only be described as the wild west situation in supported housing in Birmingham. When we went there, we were shocked: we saw whole streets where rogue landlords had bought up three-bedroom houses, extended them to the side, to the rear and upwards, and converted them into eight single-room properties, with a small shared kitchen and bathroom. More shocking than that was the fact that these landlords were not providing any support whatsoever to the vulnerable people living in their properties.”
“I rise to speak about an issue that goes to the very heart of the responsibilities we have as parliamentarians: namely, the duty to protect the most vulnerable people in our society from exploitation, neglect and harm. In 2016, I had the honour of being drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot. I sat on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee for some 14 years prior to the last general election, and at the time we were conducting an inquiry into homelessness in England. I was shocked by the treatment that single homeless people received from local authorities and the public sector in general, so I had the privilege of sponsoring the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017—it took 18 months to be enacted—to transform how we prevent and respond to homelessness in this country.”
“That is why we must implement the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act, and we must do so with urgency. In closing, I ask the Government simply to bring forward the regulations and the guidance, ensure that the April 2027 timetable is met without further delay, provide the resources needed for effective implementation, and ensure that no further delays stand in the way of protecting vulnerable people. Let us honour the intent of this House, let us deliver on the promise we made in 2023, and let us never again allow vulnerable people to be treated as commodities in a broken system. The time for action is now. I look forward to the Minister’s response.”
“It is about meaningful support, opportunities for training, work and a sense of community and belonging. It is about rebuilding lives. We must ensure that these voices are at the heart of the new system shaping national standards, informing local strategies and holding providers to account. Ultimately, that is what this Act is about: it is about people—people who have already faced significant hardship and who deserve better from us. The Act represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reset the system, drive out rogue landlords, raise standards and ensure that supported housing truly supports those in need. We should just look at the success of my first Act—the Homelessness Reduction Act—which, I say again, has prevented 1.6 million people from being made homeless.”
“We must ensure that local authorities have the resources they need to implement licensing and enforcement, the new burdens placed on councils must be fully funded if the system is to succeed, and we must ensure that, as we tackle rogue provision, we do not inadvertently increase homelessness. The Government’s commitment to produce guidance on rehousing residents affected by scheme closures is welcome, but I would caution that guidance alone is not enough. Local authorities must be supported financially and strategically to prevent homelessness and to take a proactive, co-ordinated approach. We must also listen to those with lived experience. Evidence from residents, including the testimonies gathered by Emmaus, consistently shows that good supported housing is about more than accommodation.”
“Others, however, pass the costs on to the residents, charging additional fees that push people further into poverty. If we are serious about making this system work, we must address that imbalance. The Treasury’s ongoing review of homelessness spending presents an opportunity to align funding with the new regulatory framework. As Crisis has argued, this must include a reset and an increase in funding for support services, including approaches such as Housing First and floating support. I urge the Government—they have not only a majority on their side, but support across the House on this issue—to really get on and do it.”
“The problem in this sector has been exacerbated by years of under-investment in support services. Crisis has made it clear that the growth of poor-quality, non-commissioned provision is closely linked to the decline in funding for support and the absence of a dedicated national funding stream. Housing benefit can cover higher rents, but it cannot fund support services. That creates a perverse incentive, in that providers must house people with support needs to qualify for higher payments, but there is no dedicated funding to meet those needs. Some providers go to great lengths to bridge this gap, relying on charitable funding or volunteers. That has been highlighted by Emmaus, and its model demonstrates the value of meaningful activity, work and community.”
“The Government have indicated that implementation will begin in April 2027, four years after my Act received Royal Assent. I welcome the commitment, but we have pointed out that there must be no further delay, given the scale of harm that has already been caused since the Act was passed. During that time, the harms we sought to address have escalated. We must continue to ensure that these people do not continue their profit making. Every month of delay allows rogue landlords to operate unchecked. Every delay means more vulnerable people placed in unsafe conditions. Every delay represents a failure to deliver on the promise we made on a cross-party basis in this House. We must ask ourselves: how many more people will suffer before these powers are brought into force? We must also recognise that regulation alone is not enough.”
“I hope that we can ensure that some of the weasel ways that some rogue landlords use to get around things can be corrected. These are supposed to be not-for-profit organisations, but often a person will buy a property and rent it to a registered charity, which then pays rent to the landlord. Although the charity is not making a profit, the owner of the property is making a fortune. I hope we can correct that particular area. I also welcome the decision, strongly supported by Crisis, to make eligibility for enhanced housing benefit contingent on a scheme holding a licence. That gives the system real teeth, removing the financial incentive that has driven rogue providers into the market, but I must express my concern about the timeline.”
“The Act requires councils to develop local strategies, ensuring that supported housing provision is aligned with genuine local need, rather than driven by profit. That issue has been highlighted by Crisis and Emmaus UK research. Crucially, the Act allows for the linking of enhanced housing benefit to compliance, ensuring that public money supports only those providers that meet the required standards. The reality is that the system is costing the taxpayer a fortune, and it is going to rogue landlords. The Government’s recent response to the consultation provides much-needed further detail on how the measures will be implemented, and I welcome the commitment to a national licensing system, the introduction of national supported housing standards and the application of a fit and proper person test for those managing schemes.”
“I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. Clearly, if people are living in tents or are homeless on the streets, they are not getting the support they need to rebuild their lives, which is the key. I introduced the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 to provide the framework we need to bring order, accountability and integrity to the sector. The Act enables the introduction of national supported housing standards—clear benchmarks for what good provision looks like, covering both accommodation and support. It establishes a licensing regime, empowering local authorities to approve, monitor and, where necessary, shut down providers that fail to meet the standards.”
“I thank the Minister for the response she has given thus far. I am not going to get into the politics of this, but local government reorganisation is going on, so could she say a little about what will happen to ensure that local government sets up in the right sort of way with the licensing scheme?”
“T8. Ministers will be aware that Ashab al-Yamin has claimed responsibility for the terrorist attacks across north-west London on Jewish synagogues, places of worship, businesses and homes. That is a group that takes its orders directly from Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. What action have Ministers taken to call in the diplomats from Iran and expel them, because they are instructing terrorist attacks on our citizens?”
“Will he look not only at proscription of the IRGC but the immediate proscription of Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia, so that membership of that organisation is a criminal offence? Equally, will he make sure that the charities behind these people—the Dar Alhekma Trust and the Abrar Islamic Foundation, which I wrote to the Minister about a year ago—are also proscribed, as well as the 16 other Islamic charities that have been proscribed by the Arab states? The reality is that we have to take prompt and firm action to stop this terrorist activity now. What starts with the hate marches ends up with synagogues being burned and Jewish people feeling unsafe.”
“I commend the police and the fire brigade for their prompt action in the early hours of Sunday morning. It was a reassurance patrol that spotted the firebombing of Kenton shul and prevented it from burning down completely, so that is welcome. Equally welcome is the extension of the section 60 notice, not just to Barnet but to Harrow and Brent—I think that has been announced while the Minister has been on his feet. We have to recognise that this is a series of terrorist attacks on the Jewish community. I have people contacting me saying, “Am I safe in my own home, let alone going to the synagogue?” That is a disgrace for this country and we have to take action immediately.”
“On Tuesday 28 April there will be a debate on Government support for park home owners. I managed to get a private Member’s Bill through this place, which became the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. We are still awaiting the implementation of that Act, which means that vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords. I understand that the Department has completed the consultation on the regulations to implement the Act, but it is likely that we will not see it implemented until 2027. Could the Leader of the House arrange for a statement in this place next week on what exactly the Government are doing to implement the Act, which has cross-party support? If there is no statement, Mr Speaker, may I urge you to allow me an Adjournment debate on the subject?”
“Bring back Middlesex, I say. On behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, I remind the Leader of the House that we await the promised motion to change the Standing Orders for the election of the Backbench Business Committee for the new Session. In addition to the business announced by the Leader of the House, next Thursday in the Chamber there will be Select Committee statements from the Environmental Audit Committee and the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee. Turning to the business in Westminster Hall. on Tuesday 21 April there will be a debate on the need for an independent national review body overseeing wheelchair provision. On Thursday 23 April there will be a debate on access to education and training for young adult carers, followed by a debate on gambling advertising.”
“One of the challenges of tying defence expenditure to GDP is that the economy fluctuates. When Labour crashed the economy in 2008, defence spending in GDP terms went up. The reality is that as the economy fluctuates over the course of this Parliament and the next, there could be a challenge for actual defence spending. As the Minister looks at the defence investment plan, can he ensure that the level of expenditure continues to rise so that we actually get the investment in defence that we need?”
“It is welcome news that NHS England has reduced the faecal immunochemical test threshold from 120 micrograms to 80 micrograms, bringing England into line with Scotland and Wales. We now need investment in endoscopy and other related treatments to ensure that people suffering from bowel cancer are spotted early and given the ultimate chance of survival. Could Ministers look at further investment here to increase survival rates?”
“T3. Yesterday came the welcome news that Queensbury station, in my constituency, is one of five new stations that will be considered for step-free access. That makes almost the entire Jubilee line step-free, except for Stanmore station, which Transport for London classifies as step-free, even though my residents face 49 steps on the main staircase, 10 at the side and access via a very steep ramp from the car park, which even a Paralympian cannot manage. Could the Minister responding to this afternoon’s debate agree to a new legal definition of “step-free access”?”
“We have all had the dreadful experience of having a tyre go when driving over a pothole. The pothole is reported and the workforce from the council come round, pour some pitch into it and roll it, but then it rains and the pitch is washed away. In Harrow, we have a unique solution to that. We have a Pothole Pro—affectionately known as Pothole Pete—that recycles the surface and cements a layer to ensure that it cannot be removed. That means that it is far more efficient and effective. Will the Leader of the House commend this to councils up and down the country?”
“On Tuesday 21 April, there will be a debate on the merits of the independent national revision body on overseeing wheelchair provision. On Thursday 23 April, there will be a debate on access to education and training for young adult carers, followed by a debate on gambling advertising. I remind the House that Government Parliamentary Private Secretaries should not put in bids to the Backbench Business Committee. I am aware that the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) became a PPS after she submitted her bid, and I am grateful to her for arranging for someone else to take on her debate. In addition, may I urge the House to respond to the Modernisation Committee’s consultation on Backbench Business time and petitions? We had a lively debate on potholes in Transport questions.”
“I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business for the two weeks after Easter. I note that yesterday the House rose early when the Government business finished. We could have had a three-hour debate in Backbench Business time if that had been made available. I also note that we are not being given any time in the week after Easter, other than half a day on the Monday when we come back. In Westminster Hall, the debates on Tuesday 14 April will be on hidden credit liabilities and the role of the Financial Conduct Authority. On Thursday 16 April, there will be a Select Committee statement from the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, followed by debates on the housing needs of young people and the NHS federated data platform.”
“The problem for the West London Alliance, which comprises six boroughs, is the lack of grid capacity, which means that new home developments and new projects providing business opportunities are frozen for a number of years, into the 2030s. Unless there is urgent action to provide more power to the grid, all those excellent projects will be frozen for far too long.”
“T2. In Harrow we have suffered two industrial-scale dumping incidents on land that is earmarked for much-needed housing development. It has cost thousands of pounds to clear up. The council has issued more than a thousand fines for people dumping their rubbish on the streets. I welcome the decision by the Secretary of State to introduce further measures. Will she outline what those measures are and when they will be introduced, so that we can end this scourge of fly-tipping?”
“The councillors, however, chose another bid of £1.2 million. This was kept secret. Now the trustees have taken the case to court and, indeed, have got to a position whereby the judge has stayed the sale of the site. Could we have a statement from the Secretary of State next week on what action he will take to ensure that we preserve the opportunity for Hindus in Peterborough and across the country to celebrate their religion in proper fashion in peace and harmony?”
“On Thursday 16 April, there will be a debate on the housing needs of young people, followed by a debate on the NHS federated data platform. I hope that the Leader of the House will bring forward the necessary changes to Standing Orders that he promised before we prorogue for the state opening of Parliament. In my position as chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for British Hindus, I have been in contact with Peterborough city council about the plight of the Bharat Hindu Samaj temple. This is the only Hindu temple in Peterborough. There are 11 mosques in the area, and I wish them Eid Mubarak as we approach the end of Ramadan. The council decided to sell the temple after the trustees of the temple agreed to match any other bid that came forward. They eventually offered £1.4 million.”
“I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the Chamber business for next week. Could he give us early notice of whether we will get time after Easter, so that the Committee can allocate time accordingly? In addition, next Thursday there will be a statement from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee on its report on coastal erosion. In Westminster Hall, next Tuesday there will be a debate on sudden unexplained death in childhood, and on Thursday 26 March there will be a debate on outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability, followed by a debate on the potential merits of mandatory body armour for prison officers. On Tuesday 14 April, when we come back, there will be a debate on hidden credit liabilities and the role of the Financial Conduct Authority.”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to make sure that the record is corrected. Before I mentioned Peterborough temple, I sent an email out of courtesy to the office of the hon. Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) this morning to inform him that I was intending to raise it. I was also extremely cautious to talk only about things that are in the public domain, because there is an ongoing court case and I did not want to refer to any further details.”
“I welcome the continued commitment to combating terrible diseases such as HIV, malaria and tuberculosis, but the Foreign Secretary has not mentioned polio. After many years of investment, we have almost got to the point of eradicating the disease. If that programme ceases, the risk is that polio will come back in a big way. In areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan the disease still seems to be rampant, and they are involved in a conflict, as she will know. Will she confirm that funding for the programme will continue, so that we can eradicate polio once and for all?”
“Clearly, the Home Secretary has the power to ban marches but no power to deal with static protests. This weekend we had the annual al-Quds hate demonstration, at which individuals regularly chanted antisemitic slogans, but the police could take no action. Will the Minister have discussions with the Home Secretary on what can be done to police and ban static demonstrations that will clearly lead to a contravention of the law? The big problem in London is that police are being sucked into the centre of the city and taken away from the boroughs where they should be doing their policing work.”
“The Prime Minister admitted to this House that he knew about the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Mandelson. From the documentation that has been released so far, it appears that the Prime Minister did not actually interview Peter Mandelson for the job or make a decision on that; it was left to staffers. Despite that, there are newsreels showing both the Prime Minister and Peter Mandelson in public places, obviously having convivial discussions. Will the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister confirm that the Prime Minister did not formally interview Peter Mandelson for the job—and if not, why not?”