Dame Karen Bradley
MP for Staffordshire Moorlands · Conservative · United Kingdom
“The Leader of the House knows that I have enormous respect for him, and I am sure that this is quite a difficult statement for him to make, particularly as the right hon. Member for Makerfield will face unfavourable comparisons with Boris Johnson, who did come to this House and make a statement before the summer recess.”
“I thank the hon. Member—my friend from the Select Committee—for an enjoyable visit. We learned a lot, but it was a challenging visit, as there was an awful lot to take in. This is a problem that affects countries across the world; it is not an issue that can be solved by one country alone. We have to work together.”
“Members for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh (Chris Murray), for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) and for Bassetlaw (Jo White) were all there to see the work being done. It is very impressive to see the work being done jointly with the UK.”
“Someone’s immigration status may make them more vulnerable, but it is a financial crime—it is the exploitation of one human being by another for financial gain.”
“Like many on this side of the House, I have very fond memories of Ann. She made the effort to travel to Staffordshire Moorlands—not many people do; we are quite isolated— [ Interruption. ] Yes, they come to Alton Towers—the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) is quite right.”
“It is an honour to follow the hon. Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon). He was absolutely right about the tone we need to employ. I recognise the comments he made about his constituents. I suspect that his constituents have a very similar view to my constituents—we are not too far apart.”
The complete record
Every one of 601 lines we hold for Dame Karen Bradley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting this statement. The banning of away fans at football matches is highly unusual in this country. The imposition of such a ban on fans from another country is almost unprecedented. The fact that the ban was on fans of an Israeli club playing at a venue situated among sizeable Muslim communities added a level of political sensitivity. That is why the Committee took the unusual step of writing to the then chief constable of West Midlands police to seek an explanation. We were surprised by what this simple request eventually exposed.”
“I thank the shadow Secretary of State for his question, and I agree with what he said. I will give the Minister for Policing and Crime, who was new in her post, credit for coming in front of the Committee and giving us a full account of what happened, but having been a Minister in the Home Office, I cannot believe that somebody did not spot the possibility of this problem and that alarm bells were not ringing. An earlier intervention—privately and behind the scenes, not impacting on operational independence—could have averted this whole problem. It could have been done without anybody knowing that there was a working assumption to ban the away fans, and the match could have gone ahead in the normal way.”
“We could not find actual evidence of antisemitism, but the very fact that we had elected politicians who were campaigning not just for a ban on away fans, but for the whole match to be cancelled, sitting on the safety advisory group, which provided the advice to Birmingham city council on the safety certificate, has to be cause of great concern. I know that it has given great concern to the Jewish community across Birmingham who are in contact with me. I urge all safety advisory groups to make sure that there cannot be any inference of political interference—that nobody can think that there is political interference. The groups have to be fully transparent, and everyone has to appreciate and understand why decisions are taken.”
“I thank my right hon. Friend for his question. He makes an incredibly important point, which was really the basis of many of the questions that the Committee put when we took evidence in person. The suspicion was there that the decision had been taken not because of worries about violence from the Maccabi fans, but because of their religion. It has to be said that two weeks later, another match went ahead at Aston Villa with away fans—against the Swiss team Young Boys—and there was significant violence, but nobody suggested that those away fans should not attend. We were very concerned.”
“I do hope that West Midlands police and all police forces have learned lessons from this. I must say, I have spoken to other forces that have been incredibly helpful, including the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, who came in front of the Committee. They have been clear that they would not allow this to happen. I do hope that West Midlands police has learned its lesson.”
“That would be a question for West Midlands police, but my hon. Friend is right. There obviously is a role for artificial intelligence in many areas of public life, including policing, but when any of us searches for something and artificial intelligence provides information, we should not neglect to double-check the information, click on the links it provides or make sure that we talk to the right people about it. The West Ham match that was cited as part of the reason for banning away fans and for tensions being identified never happened. Why did someone not pick up the phone to the Metropolitan police and ask what its experience had been at this fictitious match? They would pretty quickly have discovered that the match never took place and that it was not a genuine fixture.”
“It is a great shame that that did not happen. The hon. Member asks specifically about senior members of the police. The then chief constable has now retired, but once the conduct inquiry has completed, further action might be taken.”
“My hon. Friend is right that sport has a role to play in bringing us together. We have just seen at the winter Olympics the joy that the athletes feel and the sense of pride in the country at the success of Team GB. It is one of those areas where there should not be political tensions or issues. It should be viewed joyfully, and fans should be allowed to enjoy their teams playing. That is something that we do so well in this country, and that is why this incident is such a stain on us. Throughout the years we have managed to facilitate away fans attending games and enjoying those fixtures in a safe way. Football is not what it was in the past; it is a family game now. I go to football matches with my son all the time. I enjoy the atmosphere and I enjoy the fact that it is somewhere families can be.”
“I cannot be the only Member of this House with constituents who are dual nationals for whom the information and data requirements are making it difficult to get hold of passports overseas. In the light of those difficulties, might the Minister consider an interim measure, perhaps allowing those individuals to use an electronic travel authorisation for a limited amount of time, while they sort out getting hold of the passports?”
“Organised criminality is behind much of the money laundering that we see on our high streets, which is why my Committee last week launched an inquiry looking at organised criminality and the role it plays in the crime we see in neighbourhoods up and down the country. Will the Minister set out the support the Home Office is giving to the National Crime Agency on this issue and how he envisages the NCA working with the 12 mega-forces and the national police force envisaged in the White Paper?”
“I rise with incredulity, having learned that there was not a requirement to dispose of the interest. I recall going through ethics and propriety when being made a Minister, and I was told that it would be entirely inappropriate to hold things. I know of colleagues who had to dispose of their interests. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the noble Baroness Gray had still been running propriety and ethics, something like this would not have happened?”
“We all look forward to whatever it is that the Government have decided to change here, but can I ask the Minister to look at two points? First, can he look at when appeals can be made to valuations? At the moment, businesses have to wait until 1 April, and that simply is not giving the sector any confidence. Secondly, can he look at wedding venues? They suffered enormously during covid and are likely, as things stand, not to benefit from any relief that he will announce in the next few weeks.”
“As a fellow west midlands MP, the Home Secretary will be aware that policing in her constituency is incredibly different from policing in Staffordshire Moorlands. Can she confirm that, when we get the police reform White Paper in a few weeks’ time, we will not see any moves to abolish Staffordshire police, which knows how to police Staffordshire Moorlands, and merge it into West Midlands police?”
“I can see how frustrated the Minister is, and I share her frustration. The Home Affairs Committee stands ready to work constructively with her. I gently say that I can imagine what she would say if she was standing here and I was at the Dispatch Box saying that I will announce the strategy on the last day of term—I do not think she would be terribly happy with me. From talking to organisations that work in the sector, we know that there have been real problems with getting services commissioned because of the uncertainty that the delay has caused. Can she set out what she has been doing as a Minister to reassure commissioners that they can commission services and that the strategy will not block them from doing so, so that these services can continue their great work?”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement, and I welcome the appointment of the noble Baroness Longfield as chair of the panel. She has a great track record. I have worked with her over many years and am sure that she will do a very thorough job. I am very grateful that victims are being put at the centre of the inquiry. This is about the victims, and we cannot forget their terrible suffering. They must be front and centre of everything that the inquiry does. What would happen if, during one of the local inquiries, new evidence or a new issue arises? Will it be possible to go back and look at previous inquiries, including those that have already completed, if certain issues were not identified, but are raised through this new work?”
“I would be grateful if the Minister could share any correspondence she has with the Committee because we are keen to get full transparency on this issue. Does the Minister share my incredulity that a decision that was so sensitive appears to have been taken on the basis of a single unminuted Zoom call between a West Midlands police officer and officers from Amsterdam, and that the exercise in social media scraping led the police to believe that a match that had never taken place could be cited in the evidence for the decision to ban the away fans?”
“Will the Minister provide any information about the work done by the Home Office from the point that it found out that the away fans may be banned to when the decision was taken—or was the work that could be done to enable the match to go ahead with the away fans there done only after the decision had been taken?”
“May I add my support for my hon. Friend’s opposition to compulsory reorganisation, which local authorities simply do not want? The people of Staffordshire Moorlands do not want to be in a greater Stoke-on-Trent; they want to have their own say.”
“Does the Minister consider that China represents a current threat to this country? Will he also expand on the work his officials are doing with the Members and Members’ Staff Services Team to remove potential security weaknesses, not just from this building but from MPs’ constituency offices and our homes?”
“I very much look forward to the new violence against women and girls strategy. Can the Minister give us a bit more of a clue as to when we might see it? Will it include a single definition of violence against women and girls that is applied consistently across law enforcement and the Department?”
“I am sure that my Committee will want to look closely at the very significant number of announcements that the Home Secretary has made today. She referred on a number of occasions to asylum seekers contributing when they are given support. Has she given any consideration to setting up a deferred payment scheme, much akin to the student loan scheme, so that when people are granted asylum and are in work, they can start to pay back the generosity that they have received?”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and associate myself with the tributes to the emergency services and the train crew. Our thoughts are with the victims. When we have more information, I am sure that my Home Affairs Committee will want to consider what happened and learn lessons from it. I draw the Home Secretary’s attention to our inquiry on new forms of radicalisation. If things come out of the investigation that are relevant to my Committee’s inquiry, I ask that we ensure that we learn from them, and ensure that they are included in the inquiry as soon as possible.”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and for advance sight of it. While I am very supportive of the work that is being done to increase security at Jewish synagogues and other venues, the answer cannot be constantly more security for the Jewish community. The Jewish community need to be able to live their lives fully, as the Home Secretary said, so what steps is she taking to address the extremist ideology of the perpetrator? It is present online, in schools and in mosques; it is addling brains and making people do utterly horrendous things, such as those we saw last week.”
“There is a real threat at the moment to public trust in the criminal justice system following the collapse of this trial. Will the Minister make a commitment that he, ministerial colleagues and other advisers will co-operate fully with any scrutiny work done by my Committee or other Committees of the House?”
“I welcome members of the new Government Front Bench team to their places. The previous ministerial team had been clear that they wanted to stop the use of large sites to house asylum seekers, but there has been some indication that that position may have changed. Will the Home Secretary or the Minister clarify the position, and confirm that if they are changing that position, they will learn the lessons of what went wrong previously?”
“The Minister made the point that the charges brought were under the old legislation, the Official Secrets Act, which has now been superseded. Has he made an assessment of whether the charges would have proceeded had the new offences been in place at the time the charges were brought? Will he be working with ministerial colleagues, law enforcement and others to look at whether new offences are needed in this case and in others?”
“I welcome the Leader of the House to his place and pay tribute to his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell)—I have to say to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) that she supports exactly the right football team. People in Staffordshire Moorlands are very concerned that they should have their say about what happens in devolution plans. I am sure the Leader of the House will share my astonishment that the Reform-led Staffordshire county council has put forward a proposal for an east Staffordshire unitary authority, which would see not just Staffordshire Moorlands, but Burton, Uttoxeter, Tamworth and Lichfield drawn into a greater Stoke-on-Trent. Can the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the importance of local people having their own say on what happens in their local area?”
“The burden of policing these protests is falling on certain forces more than others. That was also the case during the disorder last summer. Can the Minister give some reassurance that the Home Office is providing the support that is needed to those forces to ensure that they can manage the protests and so that their doing so does not distract from day-to-day policing?”
“May I associate myself and my Committee with your words earlier, Mr Speaker, regarding the 20th anniversary that we are marking today? Live facial recognition technology is an effective tool in community and neighbourhood policing. We know that is being used effectively by the Metropolitan police, but other police forces are nervous because they do not believe that the statutory underpinning is in place. Can the Home Secretary provide some reassurance about what the Government will do to make sure this technology can be used effectively?”
“People across the Staffordshire Moorlands are extremely concerned by the number of applications granted for solar farms and battery storage facilities. Will the Prime Minister give them some reassurance that he will change the law and that we will see good agricultural land saved for producing food, as it rightly should be?”
“That may be a shock to some in this Chamber, because there is such awareness of the issue in Australia and New Zealand but we simply do not know about it here.”
“In this particular case, a man who was convicted of raping a relative who was a child still has parental responsibility for his own child. That cannot be acceptable. Again, this feels like a piece of legislation where, at some point, we just failed to address this one issue. I hope, therefore, that this can be seen as a defect in the legislation that we all agree should be corrected. New clause 12 is a relatively simple amendment to the Modern Slavery Act 2015, but it reflects a phenomenon that we simply did not know about when we introduced the Act 10 years ago. As the Minister on the Bill, I remember going through many definitions of what constituted trafficking and exploitation, but, at the time, the phenomenon of orphanage trafficking was simply not known.”
“It concerns the removal of parental responsibility for individuals convicted of sexual offences against children. When I have talked about this to colleagues and asked them to consider supporting the new clause, they have been utterly amazed that anybody convicted of a sexual offence against a child may be allowed to have parental responsibility for their own child. That responsibility is stopped only if the offence is committed against their own child. That cannot be right. How can it be that a convicted sex offender—somebody who has been convicted of a sexual offence against a child—is allowed to make parental decisions about their own children? My hon. Friend’s constituent has talked about this—I believe that they are known as “Bethan” in this situation—and has been a real champion on this issue.”
“Although I understand that we will be pushed to Division this evening, I do hope that the Minister can say something about the Government introducing something similar—perhaps in the other place—so that we can make sure that this inappropriate content is illegal and therefore not available to be seen by children. Let me turn now to the new clauses in my name. I wish to start with new clause 123, because my hon. Friend the Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti), who has been such a champion of this legislation, has to go to a Delegated Legislation Committee at 2.30 pm. I also wish him a very happy birthday. He is choosing to spend his birthday in this Chamber and attending a DL Committee—what a hero! Again, I think that this new clause will have cross-party support.”
“It also means that there is protection for children who may be looking at this pornography—we do not want them to look at it, but we are realists and recognise that this happens—and that it does not normalise what is a really dangerous act, which should not be promoted in any way. I know from experience that social media companies will remove content if it is illegal. They will not remove it if it is not. Therefore this simple change would mean that the depiction of non-fatal strangulation would become illegal content and social media companies would therefore be forced to act. I hope that this is something that can be supported across the House.”
“Let me turn now to new clause 121 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport. I was almost disappointed not to be able to table this new clause myself, because it fits with the work that I have done previously on these issues. I was Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport when the Digital Economy Act 2017 introduced age verification for pornography. Again, new clause 121 is a simple piece of legislation, which would make non-fatal strangulation a criminal act if in pornography. This does not impact on what people may wish to do in their private lives, but it does mean that those images would not then be available to be seen in pornographic films.”
“As so often happens, a private Member’s Bill requires a statutory instrument to commence it, and that statutory instrument has not yet been laid in this House. I am sure the Minister is well aware of that and is seeking to do so. This new clause would allow the Act to commence now, rather than requiring that statutory instrument, thereby saving her a little bit of time. I hope, therefore, that she might look favourably on it. As I say, this was an Act that was supported across the House. There was no Division on it; it was very much something that we all wanted to see, so I hope that the Government accept the new clause and that the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells can follow on in the footsteps of his predecessor in making sure that this Act of Parliament becomes live and real for the people who need it.”
“I rise to speak to new clauses 12 and 123 in my name, new clause 43 in the name of the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) and new clause 121 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage). New clause 43 seeks to commence the Sex-based Harassment in Public Act 2023, which was taken through the House as a private Member’s Bill by Greg Clark, the predecessor of the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells. Greg did great work on this Bill. I was one of its supporters and a member of the Bill Committee. I spoke on Second Reading, Third Reading and in Committee. It is a simple Act, which had cross-party support—it was not in any way a controversial piece of legislation. It corrected an oversight in the law that had been missed out in a previous piece of legislation.”
“I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and for early sight of it, and I am pleased that Baroness Casey has agreed to appear before the Committee tomorrow to set out the contents of her report more clearly. However, I am concerned about the potential for inquiries intended to get to the truth to prejudice criminal trials. How does the Home Secretary envisage the two elements running alongside each other—an inquiry and criminal prosecutions?”
“Further to the question from the hon. Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish), the Home Affairs Committee has written to the Metropolitan police asking for details of any concerns it may have about the policing of this site and any particular disorder that might occur around it. I once again put it to the Minister that he must take account of these concerns. There could be very serious and significant concerns for policing in the capital.”
“I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I just want to make sure that all five Members from north Staffordshire make their voice known on the record. I support him wholeheartedly in his speech.”
“Can I draw the Home Secretary’s attention to the amendment I have tabled to the Crime and Policing Bill, which would extend the definition of exploitation in the Modern Slavery Act to include orphanage trafficking? It is a horrific crime that affects about 5 million children across the world, and it is something we need to recognise in our legislation.”
“I am so grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I get the sense that he is perhaps needing to go long, and that might be why he is taking so many interventions—I am happy to assist him in that process. I want to give him an opportunity. I know him well enough and know how much he values this place, but I have been slightly concerned by his comments throughout that he is keen to get on with it. Would he like to put on the record that he is first and foremost a parliamentarian and that being in this place is the bit of the job that he values most?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. No one in the House should be in any doubt about the threat that Iran poses to us and our national security. How confident is he that its designation in the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme will be effective? Is he looking to go further?”
“I have heard reports that the Staffordshire bull terrier may not be from Staffordshire because it is from Wednesbury. Can we confirm that Wednesbury has always been in the historical county of Staffordshire?”
“The first is a very obvious one: a big family that lives in Staffordshire Moorlands, the Talbots—including the Earl of Shrewsbury—had this very nice house at Alton Towers, and they had a house architect called Augustus Pugin, who designed and created many buildings in that area that are still standing today, including schools and the marvellous St Giles church in Cheadle. Anyone who visits them can see that they are the forerunners for what we see in Central Lobby and across Parliament. Perhaps slightly lesser known is that Richard Norman Shaw—we know that name—is an architect who also operated in Staffordshire Moorlands. He was the architect of the All Saints church, Spout Hall on St Edward Street and, as we all know, Norman Shaw North and Norman Shaw South.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) on securing this important debate in the week of Staffordshire Day. As a proud resident of Arnold Bennett’s Axe and the representative of the head of the River Trent, which gives my right hon. Friend the Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson) and others such wonderful beer, it is an honour to take part in the debate. I was pleased to hear the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell), who I will call my hon. Friend, talk about the contribution of the Minton tiles to Parliament, but I want to mention two other contributions that Staffordshire Moorlands has made to this Parliament.”
“We have so much to offer, and I want everyone to come and visit, not just to go on our rollercoasters, but to see the fantastic industrial heritage and the cultural impact that Staffordshire Moorlands has had. Happy Staffordshire Day.”
“That is why I was really pleased last year to run a year of reasons to visit Staffordshire Moorlands—not just Alton Towers, the biggest tourist attraction outside London, or the Peak Wildlife Park, with our fantastic polar bear residents, but the many artists, writers, food producers and others who contribute so much to our fantastic culture. That is why on 1 June I will be starting a year of the Moorlands village. I will not be doing 52 reasons; I will be focusing on a village and a parish every week. This week alone, I visited the Scrumbles cake shop up in Brown Edge, and then went up to one of our nature reserves. I went to see St Luke’s church in Endon, which has an incredible Burne-Jones stained glass window—a source of light of a kind that would not be seen elsewhere.”
“Friend the Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge said, three minutes is simply not enough time to talk about the whole of the cultural impact that Staffordshire Moorlands and Staffordshire have had in the United Kingdom. Culture is so important. I was a big advocate for Stoke-on-Trent when it was running to be the capital of culture, and it was a great disappointment to me that it was not chosen. I had to recuse myself from the decision. I was then the Minister who would have taken the decision, so I had to step aside and allow my deputy to take it. I hope we can come together and build something more around culture. The cultural heritage and the feeling of place and belonging are incredibly important to us.”