Liz Kendall
MP for Leicester West · Labour · United Kingdom
“That power should be in people’s hands to live or die as they choose, not as anybody else thinks they should or tells them they should. It should not just be the privilege of those with money, knowledge or resources.”
“Many have talked about having the option as a kind of insurance policy or as a comfort for them when they are going through those difficult times. That principle of choice and how important it is leads me to my second point, which is that we need better palliative care and social care before any change in the law.”
“This is the first time during this Parliament that I have been able to speak publicly about assisted dying and why I support a change in the law and, indeed, this Bill—a decision I voted for 11 years ago when the then MP for Wolverhampton South West, Rob Marris, put his assisted dying Bill to Parliament.”
“I remember reading it and thinking how amazing it was. In it, he argued that medicine in particular and society as a whole do not give the attention that we should to helping people die a good death.”
“I see today’s debate very much within that context: what makes for a good death. Alongside a change in the law on assisted dying, we must also improve palliative care and social care for families.”
“Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse) for the very powerful speech he gave earlier on this point. I have the greatest respect for the many knowledgeable, experienced and highly principled Members of the House of Lords, but it is not right and not acceptable that a tiny minority should be able to talk out the Bill with hundreds a…”
The complete record
Every one of 605 lines we hold for Liz Kendall, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 13.
“I do not agree that this Government’s approach to supporting STEM has been piecemeal. As I have said, we have announced the biggest investment into research and development by any Government ever. As part of that, alongside supporting curiosity-led research, we are for the first time directing taxpayers’ money towards key Government priorities and key British strengths, including in STEM courses. I want to make sure that everyone in this country has those opportunities, but I am more than happy to discuss with the hon. Gentleman what more he thinks we could be doing.”
“This Government are committed to giving women and girls from all walks of life the chances they need to get the jobs and opportunities of the future. Last week, I met British women tech founders in San Francisco, and this week we held the first meeting of our new women in tech taskforce to give opportunities to women to grow our economy and build a better future for Britain.”
“I thank the hon. Lady for her question. This is a serious issue, and we need to make swifter and stronger progress on it. I regularly meet Ofcom and its chief executive; indeed, I did so yesterday. I want to make sure that we do not have the delays and that we have stronger action, and this is a point I will be bringing up in future.”
“I may have to offer the hon. Lady a mince pie because she is talking baubles. This pharmaceutical deal will deliver faster access to new medicines for NHS patients and the security and stability that our world-leading pharmaceutical sector needs, including 0% tariffs on its exports to America for three years. We are also updating the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for the first time in 20 years. This is a significant deal, which the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry has welcomed. It is a pity that the hon. Lady continues to act like Scrooge.”
“We have signed a ground-breaking US-UK tech partnership deal that has delivered over £30 billion of investment to the UK, alongside our biggest ever investment into research and development, with four AI growth zones, delivering 13,000 jobs in north Wales, south Wales, the south-east and the north-east. There is our plan to upskill 7.5 million workers in AI skills and our backing of great British scientists. That is a record that I am proud of; it is a pity that the hon. Lady remains the ghost of Christmas past.”
“Our world-leading universities and the research that they do are crucial to economic growth. On average, every £1 of public research and development investment generates £8 in economic benefits for the UK over the longer term. That is why this Government are investing £86 billion over the spending review period—the largest ever investment in R&D made by any Government—to support our best and brightest researchers, boost jobs and growth, and back the long-term success of the UK.”
“The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that we do not lack in great ideas or great start-ups in this country. We need to support them better to scale up, and that is what the Government are doing across a range of sectors. The hon. Gentleman can look at the actions we are taking on UK pension schemes, to get them to invest more in UK companies, and in the Treasury and across the board. I am sure there is more we can do, but it is absolutely at the top of our agenda.”
“I absolutely will arrange for my hon. Friend to meet the relevant Minister and UKRI to make sure we get this right, because we have to do more to back our world-leading researchers and then turn that research into innovation and future growth. That is the first part of the journey, and we want to—and will—get it right.”
“The UK life sciences sector is one of our greatest national assets in not only saving lives, but driving jobs, growth and innovation. The sector has been projected to grow by £41 billion across the UK by 2030, employing an extra 100,000 people. Our life sciences sector plan will help us seize this potential and secure our ambition to be Europe’s leading life sciences economy by 2030 and the third most important globally by 2035.”
“My hon. Friend has my absolute assurance that backing our brilliant life sciences sector, universities and companies is a top priority for this Government. Alongside our support for the Swansea Bay city deal, which, as she says, includes life sciences and wellbeing, we have a £520 million life sciences innovative manufacturing fund, which is currently open for bids across all four nations. I know that she will be championing her brilliant businesses for part of that support.”
“I absolutely support all measures that back innovation, and despite what the hon. Gentleman says, I know that the Chancellor wants to do that too. It is the innovators, entrepreneurs and businesses that create jobs and growth in this country, and we are determined to do even more, particularly in these crucial sectors for the future.”
“I am very proud of the fact that we have published the strategy, delivering on one of our crucial manifesto commitments. My hon. Friend can rest assured that patience is not one of my greatest virtues, and I want to see it implemented and delivered as quickly as possible.”
“Patience may not be my middle name, but I consider that—hopefully—specific, ambitious and vigorous are part of my character. There is no route to future growth in this country without science and technology, particularly with life sciences at the core, and I and the Minister for Science in the other place, Lord Vallance, are straining every sinew. There are challenges in our life sciences sector, but we are determined to back those world-leading companies, for British patients and for the British economy.”
“The Government are determined to seize the opportunities that new technology brings, but to do that we must protect our children online and protect our critical national infrastructure from technological threats, too. That is why, today, we are tabling an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, so that we can crack down on the use of AI to depict child abuse, and why we are introducing our new cyber-security and resilience Bill to modernise the law and keep vital services safe.”
“Mobile services are essential to communities, and it is not good enough that the mast in my hon. Friend’s constituency was decommissioned without warning. Prompt action by my Department ensured that services were restored by 7 November, and Virgin Media O2 and VodafoneThree have assured us that customers will be compensated. I am sure that my hon. Friend will continue to champion his constituents’ needs.”
“I am proudly on Team UK, as are the other Members on the Government Benches. That is why we are focused on creating jobs and growth in every part of the country, backing Britain’s best researchers and innovators, and modernising our public services using the power of tech, AI and digital ID. These are the British public’s priorities; it is a pity that Opposition Members are not focused on them.”
“Digital ID will modernise the state and public services to better meet people’s needs, fit services around them and help to tackle illegal immigration, which is what the British public want and need to see. It is right that the Cabinet Office and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister are leading this vital cross-Government programme. When it is implemented and when services are fitted around people— [ Interruption. ] The hon. Lady is chuntering from a sedentary position, Mr Speaker, but it is precisely in order to modernise the state that we are doing this. Unless she is focused on the future, the hon. Lady’s party will remain stuck in the past.”
“I am happy to look into what my hon. Friend says in more detail. He knows that our post-16 education and skills White Paper sets out our vision and plan for universities, including record investment from my Department into research and development, and protecting the strategic priorities grant for science, technology, engineering and maths subjects. There is more that we can do, and I am happy to discuss it with him further.”
“Indeed, we should be criticised if we are not modernising our services to make them easier and more convenient for the public. Years from now, when we look back, I believe that having your ID on your phone will feel like second nature, putting more power directly into people’s hands and giving them more control over how they interact with government and the whole range of services. That is something worth striving for. I commend this statement to the House.”
“Ultimately, however, we want Britain to be a country where everybody has the digital skills and access to be part of the modern world, including through our new digital ID to unlock more effective services and support. To conclude, we will launch a full consultation on our plans by the end of this year, including with parliamentarians, the devolved Administrations and members of the public. Legislation informed by that process will follow shortly afterwards. I know hon. Members will have many questions and I look forward to taking them, but let me just say this. Some 92% of people over 16 already have a smartphone. Many of us already use digital credentials held in our phone wallets, from tickets to events and online banking to storing boarding passes. People should expect the same service from the Government.”
“Currently, around one in 10 UK adults do not have a passport or a driver’s licence to prove their identity, and around 1.5 million people do not have a smartphone, laptop or tablet, or are digitally excluded for another reason. We are already making progress with our digital inclusion action plan. We will continue to work closely with all the relevant organisations to understand the barriers to inclusion and how they can be overcome, so we bring everyone into the system. I want to hear directly from hon. Members across the House about these matters, and from those in the digital identity sector who have so much experience to learn from. We will consider physical alternatives to the virtual document and face-to-face support for those who need it, such as the 5% of UK households who do not have home internet access.”
“Under this Government, illegal working arrests have gone up 50% in the last year. That is progress, but our digital ID will help us to do more. It will be mandatory for right to work checks by the end of this Parliament, helping tackle illegal working, cracking down on rogue employers, creating a level playing field for employers who do the right thing, and giving people who do have the right to be here the cast-iron guarantee that this is their country and that they are welcome in the UK. For our new ID to be both effective and fair, it must be genuinely inclusive. That is non-negotiable for the Government, and for me personally.”
“We will ensure that our digital ID operates to international best practice standards for data security and privacy, and we are working closely with the National Cyber Security Centre to ensure it keeps pace with the changing threats we face. The third and final reason for introducing digital ID is to deliver greater fairness by showing exactly who has the right to work in the UK. Digital ID is not a silver bullet for tackling illegal immigration, but it will be a deterrent to would-be migrants who are considering coming to the UK, alongside all the other action we are taking. Making ID checks both mandatory and digital for all employers will provide us with far more actionable intelligence, so we can move swiftly to identify rogue employers who are not following the rules.”
“They are much less likely to be lost or stolen, they have reduced errors and mistakes, and they have helped crack down on fraudsters who can ruin peoples’ lives. Privacy and security will be hard-wired into the system from the start. There will be no pooling of people’s private information into a single, central dataset—it will be a federated data system—and user control will be at the heart of our plans. With a digital ID, people may end up having more choice over what they show the world, not less. If they are buying a drink at the bar, instead of showing a physical driving licence revealing their full name and address, they will be able to prove they are over 18 without even showing their exact birthday if they do not want to.”
“Digital ID has the potential to empower millions of people like that in the UK, with quick, effective, seamless and secure integration between different Government systems. We know that the Tell Us Once service makes the process of registering a death more straightforward, but we should not have to wait until the end of someone’s life to offer them joined-up, personalised support. So our new system will help modernise Government services to fit around people’s lives, rather than forcing them to fit into the system. The second reason for introducing digital ID is to offer people greater security and actually greater control over their own data. Other countries that have introduced digital ID find that digitally checked credentials are far more secure than physical documents.”
“Many show us just how transformative this can be. In Denmark, a graduate applying for jobs has to log into a portal only once, and their ID automatically links to their school records, saving them retyping their qualifications each time. In Finland, a parent can go online to register their children for day care without uploading a payslip or putting in their salary, and the site automatically calculates the right fee. In Estonia, a digital ID means that when someone has a baby, they do not need to go to a local office to register the birth, sign up for childcare benefits or apply for nursery places. That happens automatically from day one in the hospital, so parents are free to focus on what matters most.”
“People are passed from one person to another, and asked to repeat their story and provide basic information time and again. They are made to fit into a system, rather than the system working for them, which ultimately leaves them feeling as though they are a number on a list, not a human being with a life. Bringing in a new digital ID is about far more than replacing numerous bits of paper just for people to prove who they are. It is about changing the way the state interacts with its citizens through what I like to see as a new digital key that unlocks better, more joined-up and effective public services that actually talk to one another and fit around them. In building our new system, we will learn from the experiences of other countries, some of which have had digital ID for over 20 years.”
“Most frustratingly of all, they may have to rummage around in a drawer looking for an old electricity bill just to open a bank account, join the library or enrol their children in school. It is time to fix this: to put power back in people’s hands; to get more out of our public services; and to bring the UK into the modern age. There are three reasons why we want to introduce a new, free digital ID, available to all UK citizens and legal residents above the age of 16. First, it is about giving people greater agency over their lives. In over 15 years as a local MP, I have lost count of the number of people who have come to me because they have struggled to get the public services they need or had to battle for support from different parts of the welfare state. I am sure many hon. Members will know a frustratingly similar story.”
“I have always believed in giving people power and control over their lives: control over the public services they use and how they access childcare, benefits and housing support; control over their data, and who sees it; and control over the choices they make to rent or buy a home, apply for a job, open a bank account, and much more besides. In the age of the smartphone, we can take this control quite literally into our own hands, but too often it feels like we are at the mercy of a system that does not work for us as well as it should. It is one with endless form filling and bureaucracy just for people to prove who they are, and one where they may need their passport to apply for a job, their national insurance number to pay tax and their driving licence to buy a pint or a glass of wine—if they are lucky enough to be asked.”
“The Conservatives’ leader in June said that she had moved her position on digital ID and that if it could answer difficult problems then, yes, that was something they would look at. Given the amount of flip-flops on the other side of the Chamber, you would think it was still summer. They are not serious, and they are not credible. Until they are, they are not electable.”
“We will be working to international best practice standards. There are not many advantages to lagging behind so many other countries—many other countries—that have digital ID, but one is that we can learn from their experience when things have gone wrong and how they improved their security. That is what we intend to do. I finish by saying this. The hon. Lady comes to the Dispatch Box with fire and brimstone, but it is quite interesting that she differs from the shadow Home Secretary. Back in February, the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp) backed the idea, saying there were “very significant benefits”. In August, he said the Conservatives should consider it.”
“Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is definitely the first time I have been called a big fat socialist. [ Laughter. ] The hon. Lady asks how it will help crack down on illegal immigration. Making ID mandatory and digital will really help us to get, much more swiftly and automatically, more actionable intelligence about rogue employers, and about who are doing the checks they are required to do and who are not. Secondly, the hon. Lady talks about those who are digitally excluded. As I said in my statement, I take that issue extremely seriously. We actually have a digital inclusion action plan. The Conservatives did not do one for 10 years. If they cared so much about it, perhaps they would have done. Understandably and rightly, I am sure we will have lots of questions about having the highest possible standards.”
“My hon. Friend is right to raise the important issues of security—people are rightly concerned about the security of their data, and that is why that will be at the heart of our consultation. In answer to her specific questions: yes, people will control who sees and accesses their data, and we absolutely expect this system to be designed and built within Government, building on the One Login.”
“I will try to keep this brief, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Lady raises a number of different issues that I mentioned in my statement. On digital exclusion, we have a digital inclusion action plan and will be spending £9.5 million in local areas to help people who are currently excluded to get online. We will be publishing a full consultation on that, and I am sure she will feed in her views. It is interesting that the Liberal Democrat leader, the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), said last month that if a UK system were about giving individuals the power to access public services, he could be in favour of it. I hope the Liberal Democrats drop their partisan approach and work with us to deliver the system. I say to the hon. Lady and to other hon. Members that many, many other countries have digital ID systems.”
“Yes, I do. My hon. Friend is right that the citizens of this country rightly want to know who has a right to be here and who has a right to work here. That is a very important principle.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her question. We also need to look at the potential benefits of this policy in savings from cracking down on fraud and making services more effective and efficient. Clearly, the eventual cost will depend on the design and build of the system, which is what we are consulting on. I am sure that she and many other colleagues will feed in their views.”
“These are not hypotheticals; we are looking at how other countries have used these systems to deliver more effective Government and other services to their citizens. We have proposed having mandatory right-to-work checks by the end of the Parliament, but there will be many important voluntary ways in which people can better access services and support. We will be consulting on that fully when we come forward with the detailed proposals.”
“I have already said that the scheme will not be used for that. In many other countries these systems have made accessing Government and public services much easier, quicker and more efficient. I think there is some scaremongering about this issue. Such schemes in other countries really have made Government fit around people, rather than making people fit into Government and their different services, and I think that is a huge benefit.”
“I think that providing better value for taxpayer money by getting services to work more quickly, effectively and efficiently and by cracking down on fraud and reducing error and waste is a really important part of delivering for the British people.”
“We absolutely will not. If the hon. Gentleman would like to write to me with more detail about areas and groups of people in his constituency who are digitality excluded, I will make a commitment to doing everything possible to tackle that problem.”
“I absolutely do. The countries that have introduced digital ID have found that it helps to tackle fraud. People can lose forms of identity and they can be used by other people. The scheme will help to tackle that problem as well as make services more effective and efficient.”
“I do not know why the right hon. Gentleman thinks that people should not be required to prove that they have the right to work in this country. It seems a very reasonable thing to do. Some 92% of people over 16 have a phone, and as I said in answer to a previous question, we are consulting on how we will design and develop this whole programme. Further details about costings will come out in due course.”
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We will be learning lessons from those countries. People will be able to see who accesses their data, so this proposal will give them more power and control. If I may, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will reply to the second question from the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois). There will not be a sanction or penalty for people who do not carry digital ID. There will remain penalties on employers who do not obey the law and do ID checks, but there will not be penalties on the individual.”
“I think that when the British people—so many of whom now have online banking on their phones and store so much in their digital wallets—look at their friends, neighbours and colleagues across the channel and see that many across Europe have digital ID as a matter of course and that it makes their lives simpler and easier, their common sense will say, “We want a bit of that.””
“The Prime Minister has been very clear that it will be mandatory for right to work checks, but I can confirm to my hon. Friend that we do not want one big, centralised data set and that it will be federated. That is one of the lessons we learned from other countries. I am sure that there are many more things we will have to do to make sure that people’s data is secure, but this will give people more control because they will be able to see who accesses their data, and that is a good thing.”
“I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. He has a lot of experience in this area. We want not only to learn from other countries but to work closely with the National Cyber Security Centre to make sure that we have the highest possible standards of security. Where mistakes have been made, we can learn to put them right, and we are determined to do that. I am very happy to meet the right hon. Gentleman to discuss this in more detail, because we want to get this right.”
“The hon. Member is always rightly concerned to see the evidence, and when we publish our consultation on this proposal she will see it all there. It is important to understand that making ID checks mandatory and digital, rather than solely relying on getting information from individuals, as we do at the present, can make a real difference in identifying those who are not doing the full range of checks. It is not the only thing we need to tackle rogue employers, and there are many other actions we need to take, but it is a good step forward.”
“It is not a Britcard. I must say that I am tiny bit confused, because in March 2021 the Scottish Government published “A changing nation: how Scotland will thrive in a digital world”, which included plans to “Introduce a digital identity service for users…to prove who they are, and that they are eligible for a service.” The hon. Member had better make up his mind.”
“In the 15 years that I have been an MP, many people have said that it can be a nightmare trying to talk to different bits of the public sector: repeatedly having to give the same information and tell their story time and again. They are concerned about illegal working in this country. This is an important step forward in terms of improving how the state fits around people’s lives—it does not force them to fit into the system—and I think that is an issue that many Members across the House have in common with their constituents.”
“We have a £9.5 million digital inclusion fund that will support local organisations with grants of between £25,000 and £500,000 to help specific groups of people who are currently digitally excluded, to ensure that they can get the benefits of all manner of different private and public sector services that are available online. We will announce the results of the application process shortly. As always, I am happy to meet the hon. Gentleman for him to tell me about the specific issues in his constituency. If we need to do more to ensure that everybody is digitally included, we will act.”