Dame Chi Onwurah
MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West · Labour · United Kingdom
“An extraordinary debate is going on right now inside and outside AI companies about whether the possibility of AI destroying humanity is more or less than 10%. The European Union is moving ahead with a comprehensive AI regulatory framework, but the UK continues to rely on existing regulation.”
“The Pope also highlighted how the billions of online digital twins constitute an unprecedented concentration of power in the hands of a small number of men. Among the many consequences of the 40 years of neoliberalism repeatedly called out by the Prime Minister is a libertarian attitude to technology.”
“But this stealth digital twinning violates the integrity, uniqueness and very personhood of our constituents and of all of us. Digital twins can take many forms, from content creation algorithms and deepfakes to chatbots that reflect aspects of our personalities back at us. It is particularly worrying when children are the target.”
“The automated version of our kids will grow with them, using the power of AI to target advertising and products at them, and worse. The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee has heard about some of the tragic consequences of online grooming by algorithms and chatbots—a vulnerable boy persuaded to kill himself; a vulnerable girl fed…”
“In the arts, entertainment and tech industries, many performers are agreeing to the creation and use of digital replicas as part of their work—think of ABBA Voyage. But performers increasingly encounter unauthorised digital replicas of themselves, which pose a threat to their career, livelihood and reputation.”
“Since then, deepfakes have proliferated. The hon. Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman) was shown crossing the Floor in Parliament to join Reform, to his constituents’ consternation and his own—it was a fake. Then there were the horrendous photos of naked women and girls that Elon Musk’s AI created on demand.”
The complete record
Every one of 5,139 lines we hold for Dame Chi Onwurah, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 24 of 103.
“Does the Minister have an estimate of the multiplier effect of the spending at this stage? How are the Government intending to measure the productivity impact of a programme? Over what timeframe would we expect to see a return on the spending? Will the Minister report to the House on the impacts of the programme? Finally, there is a wider question on the conditions for success external to this programme. SMEs have had a difficult time during the pandemic, with many, such as those in hospitality, having to effectively go into hibernation during lockdowns. With cases of covid-19 still very high, there is always a chance of further impacts in the future too.”
“Does the programme make provision for digital technologies that specific businesses may need to grow? These include, for example, those in our wonderful creative industries, which were so successful at last night’s Emmys. I worry that there is something of a one-size-fits-all approach. While there are many things that are common to SMEs, such as basic accounting, others may need more tailored support. What is the Minister doing on digital inclusion for businesses? The Government seem very happy to leave it to Google and Facebook, and their programmes, which I support, but they do require businesses to use Google and Facebook products. What are the Government doing more generally on digital inclusion? On the value-for-money point, can the Minister set out how the impact of this spending will be measured?”
“He has spoken a little bit about the success of the vendor process so far, but how were the digital technology vendors selected and how were the particular technologies selected? Are the technologies purchased at the high street price or have discounts been achieved? I asked a written question last week about what the marketing budget for the programme was, but was told only the total budget in response. Can the Minister tell us what proportion of this budget is for the technology and what proportion is for other costs such as marketing? He mentioned the need to get to hard-to-reach businesses, and I have talked about the need to reach businesses across the country, so is there a marketing budget, and if so, what is it? Fourthly, I would like to ask about sector-specific digital technologies.”
“I was so impressed by the speed at which Grainger Market in my constituency responded to the lockdown, with many traders moving online within three weeks of lockdown to ensure that their businesses survived. It is not to be expected that, in those three weeks, they managed to obtain all the digital skills they needed. Yet, according to the online guidelines, many market traders can be excluded if they have fewer than five employees. The Government may want to go back to the past of imperial weights and measures, but the market traders in my constituency are looking to the future, and digital, and they will not be happy to find that the Government are not interested in helping them. Thirdly, will the Minister inform us of the procurement process for the technology that the £296 million is for?”
“Secondly, what has been the take-up of the scheme? It has been open for registration since March. How many SMEs have registered, and how many do the Government expect to register in future? What measures are being applied to ensure that businesses that are under-represented by sector, female-led and ethnic minority-led businesses, or businesses led by disabled people, are accessing the programme? Furthermore, given the Government’s commitment to levelling up—we have a new Department with that in its title—what provisions are there to ensure that this funding makes its way across the country rather than focusing on growth in London and the south-east? What is the Minister doing to encourage regional take-up?”
“We want the programme to be successful and to deliver on its aims of supporting productivity and growth while providing value for money for the taxpayer. It is on the latter point that the Government have been reticent of late, so I have a number of questions for the Minister. First, I want to ask about the limits of the programme, and specifically whether it extends to charities, mutuals, co-operatives and other organisations that need to grow and have significant economic outputs and make a significant contribution to our economy. As this is taxpayers’ money, it seems reasonable for the scheme to cover all manner of organisations that taxpayers are engaged with. Charities in particular have taken a hard hit from the pandemic, with reduced fundraising and many taking on vital local government functions following years of funding cuts.”
“Unfortunately, the Government have used the pandemic to give away taxpayers’ money for little return, often without a proper tendering process and in some cases to people with direct connections to Ministers. For that reason, we should all be hyper-vigilant about how the Government are spending money. The motion refers to one part of a two-part programme of support. “Help to Grow: Management” was approved in May. Will the Minister up the Committee on the scheme’s progress? How will “Help to Grow: Digital” work with the previous programme, or are they completely separate? Can companies take advantage of both? I hope that all SMEs will take advantage of the new programme, and it will come as no surprise to the Minister that Labour will not oppose the motion. We support funding to help SMEs be successful.”
“Support for SMEs is essential to rebuilding the economy after the pandemic. Britain has almost 6 million SMEs, and many need help to grow. They drive innovation, take risks and collectively employ 16 million people—nearly two thirds of the workforce. Growing SMEs means growing the economy, more jobs and more choice for consumers, so Labour believes strongly that small businesses should be at the heart of the recovery from covid. We are worried by the drop in new start-ups, which are down 11% since 2016. In April, Labour promised £1 billion of funding to support the creation of 100,000 start-ups across the country in the first term of a Labour Administration.”
“It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir George. I welcome the new Science Minister to his position; I hope he stays around long enough to ensure that we have a long-term plan for science, which has been sorely missing. I thank the Minister for his opening remarks, in which he laid out some of the challenges and problems in productivity and supporting business growth. As he said, we are debating a motion to approve £296 million of compensation over three years to digital technology product vendors for some of the costs of providing technology to SMEs as part of the “Help to Grow: Digital” programme. The programme will provide advice on how technology can boost a business as well as discounts of up to £5,000 on approved software for boosting sales and for day-to-day management.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I did not express any pessimism about our fantastic businesses and economic opportunities. I was talking about some of the figures for business start-ups in the last few years, which I hope he recognises.”
“I congratulate the Minister on retaining his position and welcome the new Secretary of State to hers. The Minister’s is a wide-ranging and critical role, not least because we need our broadband. Parliament, our businesses, our students, our economy and our social lives depend on it—but it is another broken promise. Full fibre by 2025 was the Prime Minister’s pledge, and the 2020 Budget set aside £5 billion to deliver it. Will the Minister confirm that only £1.2 billion of that £5 billion is planned to be spent by 2025 and that, far from full fibre, we will not even get affordable broadband? According to Ofcom, more than 2 million households find it hard to afford broadband, yet the Government are slashing broadband price controls, slashing the broadband budget, slashing universal credit support, and slashing gigabit targets.”
“I am pleased that the Government recognise the importance of protecting and growing sovereign and allied strategic capability, especially given their recent attempt to hand over domestic nuclear power capability to the Chinese. During the passage of the National Security and Investment Bill and the Telecoms (Security) Bill, Labour called for just such partnerships with countries that share our values to develop key technologies such as 6G. Can the Prime Minister set out how he plans to develop further partnerships, and whether European countries might be included?”
“T9. Work cuts reoffending rates in half. The Recruitment Junction in my constituency has a 50% success rate in getting ex-offenders into work—that is twice the national average. It tells me that the biggest challenge is on housing, such as for my constituent “Stuart”, who was released after 30 years in prison and was provided with just eight weeks’ accommodation. If he does not find somewhere to live by tomorrow, he will be recalled into prison, at huge cost to himself and to the taxpayer. How is the Minister going to help Stuart to get somewhere to live by tomorrow?”
“What steps the Commission is taking to ensure a covid-19 secure workplace for House of Commons staff following the lifting of restrictions on 19 July 2021.”
“I echo your repeated thanks, Mr Speaker, to the members of staff of the House of Commons, who do so much to ensure the smooth and safe proceedings of the House. Members of the House travel extensively to our constituencies and within our constituencies. Being gregarious is almost a job requirement—we meet lots of people—yet there is no requirement on us to wear a mask in this place. Will the hon. Member give further consideration to what requirements can be placed on Members of this House to better protect those who do so much to protect us?”
“Will the Minister confirm here and now that it is our foreign policy to defend human rights and the rule of law across the world? Does he agree that, as well as putting UK businesses with high human rights and labour rights at a disadvantage, signing trade agreements with some of the world’s worst human rights abusers without any human rights clauses undermines that policy and our global reputation?”
“In Thursday’s urgent question on Newport Wafer Fab, the Government emphasised their desire for a “positive relationship with China, based on mutual respect and trust.” —[ Official Report , 15 July 2021; Vol. 699, c. 537.] I hope the Minister recognises how naive that sounds, and that it reflects the chilling effect of China’s power and influence on criticism. Fortunately, politicians in all parts of this House, academics and businesses do continue to speak out. What assessment has he made of the likelihood of those who oppose the Chinese state being the target of cyber-attacks, and what is he doing to better protect them and us all?”
“All options must be kept on the table, including a role for potential public equity investment. As Labour argued during the passage of the NSI Act, the Government have consistently outsourced British national security and economic interests, because Ministers have prioritised market zeal over British security, as in 2012 when they let the Centre for Integrated Photonics, a prize British research and development centre, be taken over by Huawei. That is why Labour is calling for the national security and public interest test regime to be strengthened. This is a critical test of whether the Government are willing to use these new powers or not, which goes to the heart of what kind of industrial strategy we have and what kind of country we want to be.”
“Labour welcomes investment in the business, as we welcome almost all inward investment in thriving British industries, but, given the importance of semiconductors to our country’s critical infrastructure, there is a clear case for examining this on national security grounds, and it is a pity that the Minister did not make it. Global competition to secure microchip development is accelerating. Our national security interests require a strong position in this contested market, so how will the Minister now ensure that this vital national economic and technology asset is protected? Will she use the powers in the National Security and Investment Act 2021 to urgently scrutinise this takeover? If the sale is blocked on national security grounds, will the Government work creatively and urgently to secure the financing that the business needs?”
“I congratulate the hon. Member for The Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) on securing the urgent question. Newport Wafer Fab is a symbol of British innovation and world-class employment—not just its 450 employees but the wider regional semiconductor cluster. It is also a testament to the long-term role of public investment in strategic economic planning by the Welsh Government, so the priority must be to secure a viable long-term future for what is the UK’s largest semiconductor manufacturer. With European automotives protesting over chips shortages and promising to ramp up domestic production, it is clear that Newport Wafer Fab is a strategic economic asset.”
“A year ago, UKspace set out the urgent need for a coherent, cross-Government space strategy, and we have still not seen one. Labour would seek to support our sovereign capability in the space age and build on the UK’s proud history of technological innovation and space exploration. Labour is passionate about the long-term future of the space sector and its potential to provide high-skill, high-paying jobs across the UK and step up to deliver a long-term sustainable strategy for managing space debris, with UK businesses and our national security at the heart of this interplanetary clean-up.”
“We do not know whether that huge investment will ever support jobs in the UK space sector if the satellites continue to be manufactured in Florida. I would appreciate it if the Minister gave some clarity on the space strategy generally and specifically on OneWeb. The space sector provides the UK with many opportunities to grow our economy, push technological boundaries and boost our soft power by developing strategic interdependence with our allies, which I very much support. I am pleased that the right hon. Member for Kingswood secured this debate, but as the Minister for Space until 2019, he oversaw and was responsible for many of the policies that he referred to and the lack of an ongoing, sustainable strategy, or indeed any strategy, for our space sector.”
“Instead, we have the manifesto of a Government who have their heads in the clouds—they certainly do not have a strategy for space. Down on Earth, the sector is still waiting to hear about the future of the new regulations introduced under the Space Industry Act 2018, particularly those dealing with administrative burdens and liabilities. Nothing better illustrates the lack of strategy and transparency than the purchase of OneWeb despite the advice of experts and the concerns of the UK Space Agency. First we were told that it would be a part of our sovereign GNSS programme, but then it was not. We still do not know what the Government have planned for OneWeb. We heard that it may be part of our approach to space debris.”
“If we are to ensure the success of those programmes, we must understand whether we have the industrial capability to do so. Part of unlocking the potential of our space industry is knowing how we utilise our industrial base to achieve our goals, and in turn where we need further investment and finance to encourage outward investment by UK businesses. There is no strategy for external investment or for skills—in particular, diverse skills. The space sector needs the skills of everyone, regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion, region or age, and it is not as diverse as I am sure the Minister would like. There is no strategy for that. There is no strategy for industry and manufacturing, for sovereign navigation satellite capabilities or for whether and how we will compete with SpaceX and others.”
“Member outlined? The Government talk excitedly about global Britain, but Labour wants to see an interplanetary Britain, powered by a booming space sector. Space is not just for the stars; it impacts every household in the country. From climate change and rural broadband to transport and agriculture, from our smartphones to our credit cards, the UK space sector helps us all prosper. The satellites at risk from space debris are central to providing those services. The Government have failed to come forward with a clear, long-term space strategy to fully unlock the potential of the sector. Without such a strategy, the hard work of our space sector—developing spaceports, rocket launchpads, space domain awareness projects, military grade software and satellite projects that are critical for our vital infrastructure—cannot be fully realised.”
“Member for Kingswood set out the possible impact on our economy of space debris reducing or stopping GNSS services. The Secretary of State has decided to take control over strategy and policy away from the UK Space Agency, handing the almost £600 million budget directly to the Government. Yet, as I have mentioned, we remain without a long-term, specific space sector deal and have not received an update on the space growth partnership since its launch in March 2018. Will the Minister tell us what progress has been made by the Space Growth Partnership in achieving its stated aim of the UK making up 10% of the global space market by 2030? What role does she see space debris clean-up playing in that partnership and in that growth? What analysis will be conducted of the market risks and national security risks that the right hon.”
“Many of the jobs created in space manufacturing are also highly productive, with the average salary of an Airbus UK space employee, for example, standing at £51,000—nearly 50% higher than the UK national average. The UK’s proud history in space exploration, research and development makes us an excellent launchpad for future growth and for leadership in the space debris domain. The UK and its place in the world are changing. We have left the European Union, which meant turning our back on the Galileo project that we did so much to bring about, at an estimated cost of £1.2 billion to the taxpayer. The Government then U-turned on plans to develop a rival, sovereign GNSS system, at a cost of a further £60 million. Can the Minister tells us the status of our sovereign satellite navigation capability? The right hon.”
“Member for Kingswood alluded to, the UK joined our allies in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the EU and the US to take action to tackle space debris. Those nations agreed that we need global standards on space debris and committed to the long-term sustainable use of space. However, what will that look like in real terms? Can the Minister tell us when we will see a long-term, sustainable plan for space debris? For that matter, can she tell us when we will have a space strategy? The space industry generally is worth more than £14.8 billion per year and has grown at a rate five times greater than the wider economy since 1999. The success of this sector helps to drive prosperity across the UK. UK space businesses spend around £750 million annually, with around 1,500 UK suppliers based across every region of the UK.”
“Last year, research for the International Astronautical Congress revealed that the 50 most dangerous objects currently in orbit were all large rocket boosters, mainly from Russia, left drifting around our planet. As the right hon. Gentleman suggested, the removal of hazardous materials on Earth or in space presents a significant commercial opportunity. A joint venture between the UK and Japan, the Tokyo-based firm Astroscale, which has control centres in Oxfordshire, launched two rockets to begin the process of cleaning up some of the 9,000 tonnes of space debris. I am pleased that it is leading the way. What discussions has the Minister had with Astroscale, and what steps is she taking to support the British-based clean-up firms of the future? I am pleased that at the G7, as the right hon.”
“Since 1957, there have been 10,680 satellites launched into Earth’s orbit, with around 6,250 still in space, which is impressive, but only 3,700 are still functioning. If any two were to collide, the result could be catastrophic, creating thousands of new pieces of dangerous space junk, as the right hon. Gentleman set out. These objects could stay in orbit for hundreds of years, putting at risk working satellites that people depend on for everyday services. The threat is not only far above our heads. In May this year, an 18-tonne chunk of metal that was once the core stage of a Chinese Long March 5B rocket crashed down to Earth, narrowly missing the island of the Maldives.”
“Gentleman set out, a more socially conscious era of green growth, protecting and keeping our Earth and seas clean is commonly discussed, but rarely do we look up and think about how clean the sky beyond the Earth’s atmosphere is. That is one reason why this debate is so important—because we are addressing an under-discussed topic on which the Government have failed to provide direction, and exploring the opportunities, as set out so eloquently by the right hon. Gentleman, that may arise from the need to address space debris. I will not repeat all the statistics that the right hon. Gentleman set out, but it is striking that there are more than 900,000 objects currently orbiting the Earth, with 23,000 of those being pieces of man-made debris larger than 1 cm.”
“It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I thank the right hon. Member for Kingswood (Chris Skidmore) for having secured this important debate, and I pay tribute to him for his work as the vice-chair of the parliamentary space committee and thank him for his analysis of the issues around space debris, as well as the space history lesson. Space is such a fascinating topic, and every time we discuss it in this House, it never fails to inspire awe and excitement. Britain has a proud history of space exploration. In fact, to add to the history that the right hon. Gentleman set out, the British Interplanetary Society is the oldest space advocacy organisation on Earth; there may be other, older ones elsewhere of which we are not aware. Here on Earth, as we aim to enter, as the right hon.”
“The armed forces covenant states: “Those injured in Service, whether physically or mentally, should be cared for in a way which reflects the Nation’s moral obligation to them”. In the north-east we are proud of and grateful to our servicemen and women, but local charities such as Anxious Minds and Forward Assist tell me that mental health support is wholly inadequate. How does the Prime Minister propose to support the mental wellbeing of those returning from service in Afghanistan? Why do his Government not even collect data on how many veterans have committed suicide or experienced post-traumatic stress disorder or other mental problems?”
“On Friday I visited Newcastle University’s dementia research centre and spoke to the wonderful scientists striving to cure this terrible affliction. But I also heard of the desperate conditions that early career researchers face, with Government funding commitments abandoned; grants ending as covid devastates medical research charities excluded from Government support; institutes closed as the Government’s international development funding is slashed; and post-docs eking out funding from project to project with no job security, working two jobs at once or working for free, and unable to apply for funding in their own name—and the most disadvantaged are hardest hit. How can the Minister say that she is supporting science when she is throwing the next generation of scientists to the wolves?”
“I welcome the end of mandatory bubble isolation, which has caused such disruption to parents, teachers and children, but the impact of covid continues and the poorest are hardest hit. Over the past five years, child poverty in my constituency has risen by 13 percentage points, to 45%, which is six times the national average increase. So what additional support can children in my constituency expect, apart from the catch-up plan, which the Government’s own educational recovery commissioner described as “feeble”?”
“Is there an agreement that goods arriving into Great Britain will not be routinely subject to regulatory checks? We are in a bizarre situation when I have to even ask this question, but is the application of the market surveillance regulation in Northern Ireland a protocol commitment that the Government support, or a matter that they wish to reopen with the European Union? Businesses and consumers throughout the United Kingdom need and deserve clarity.”
“Secondly, the Government have suggested in guidance that the enforcement of the market surveillance regulation in Northern Ireland will be “proportionate, risk-based and intelligence-led”, minimising disruption to businesses. They go on to suggest that regulatory checks on goods entering Northern Ireland will continue to take place by exception, and only when there is a high level of risk. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy says that goods going into Northern Ireland from Great Britain have a low risk profile and therefore will not be routinely subject to inspection, but given current tensions over the Northern Ireland protocol and uncertainties about its implementation, will the Minister clarify the extent to which that approach has been agreed with the European Union?”
“5.] Given the additional obligations on British businesses that want to continue to sell their goods across this United Kingdom, will the Minister assure us that the Government will continue to provide all advice and guidance necessary to ensure that all British businesses are prepared for this new obligation when the regulation comes into force in less than two weeks? Targeted support might be required, and we will be watching carefully to ensure that businesses are not adversely affected by the changes after 16 July. Unfortunately, businesses have been affected adversely by an increase in bureaucracy and red tape, and in their complexity, as a consequence of the withdrawal agreement.”
“First, it is clear that the implementation of the EU market surveillance regulation in Northern Ireland will have an impact on British businesses, especially those that sell their products online from Great Britain directly to consumers in Northern Ireland. As the Minister said, GB business will need an economic operator established in Northern Ireland for compliance activities if they want to sell goods into Northern Ireland. My right hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton South East (Mr McFadden) set out the situation very well in a debate on another statutory instrument when he said: “Brexit was sold as being an end to red tape—nobody said it would be replaced with all this red, white and blue tape that we are debating today.”—[ Official Report, Fifth Delegated Legislation Committee, 24 June 2021; c.”
“By virtue of the Northern Ireland protocol to the EU-UK trade and co-operation agreement, the market surveillance regulation is directly applicable in Northern Ireland, although certain provisions of the regulation require implementation in domestic legislation, which is what the regulations are designed to do. Labour will not oppose the regulations, which are designed to provide greater protection to consumers in Northern Ireland and are required to meet the UK’s legal commitments under the EU-UK trade and co-operation agreement and the Northern Ireland protocol. However, I want to raise a small number of important issues on which I would welcome the Minister’s assurances.”
“It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Rees. I thank the Minister for setting out what the regulations do, and I shall not attempt to repeat what she said. The regulations introduce enforcement powers and offences that are necessary to give effect to the EU market surveillance regulation in Northern Ireland. As the explanatory memorandum says, they provide “for an effective” and “proportionate…penalty regime for breaches of the Regulation.” The EU’s new market surveillance regulation, which comes into effect on 16 July, is designed to provide greater protection to consumers in the face of the challenges posed by e-commerce. The intention is that, by extending compliance checks for products sold online, consumers can be assured that the products that they order online meet EU harmonised standards for health and safety.”
““Data not dates” is the Government’s mantra for lockdown easing, so should it not be the same for settled status? The data clearly shows that tens of thousands of EU citizens, to whom the Government promised the right to stay, will become undocumented overnight, criminalised for working, renting accommodation or opening a bank account. They may be young or elderly, have insufficient language or digital skills, or have been unable to return to the UK because of the pandemic. In Newcastle, we value our European residents, so will the Minister not extend the deadline? Or does he want another Windrush?”
“The Secretary of State, engaged—at least as we thought—on matters essential to our national security, health and wellbeing is filmed, unbeknownst to him, and that film is leaked to a national newspaper when it could just as well have been a foreign power. I have to say that I find the Minister’s complacency incomprehensible. Can she at least confirm that the Government know where each Government CCTV camera is, who has access to them and whether outsourcing has led to a plethora of private security firms and other contractors having access to the footage?”
“In Newcastle, infection rates are doubling every week and are now at over 400 per 100,000. The Secretary of State may think that that is not important because, thankfully, hospitalisations and deaths are not rising at the same pace, but more and more people are being asked to self-isolate. My constituents want to do the right thing, and the vast majority do, but support is woeful. Does he recognise that that is one reason for higher rates in areas with higher levels of low-paid and insecure work? As a former Chancellor, will he fight for more support, including extending eligibility to anyone without access to workplace sick pay?”
“I would like to thank the Minister for that response, but it is not really one, is it? As well as being a great icon of north-east people, culture and engineering, the Tyne bridge is an essential part of our transport infrastructure and it is in a dire state. Hon. Members from across the region, together with local authority leaders, the North of Tyne Mayor and the police and crime commissioner, have written to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Secretary of State for Transport in support of an £18.5 million bid to the levelling-up fund. Does the Minister agree that the Tyne bridge must be levelled up if it is going to be in a fit state to celebrate its 100th birthday in 2028 as a beautiful and functional symbol of the north?”
“Will the Minister talk to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to ensure support for protecting our kittiwakes? In the north-east, we know how to give a party. The north-east will bring our bridge, our passion and our people to the party. What will the Minister bring?”
“For example, Newcastle City Council has lost more than a third of its spending power since 2010, with city spending entirely taken up by statutory duties such as social care. Does the Minister agree that local authorities cannot be expected to fund such a major project? Would he expect Westminster City Council to pay for the refurbishment of the Big Ben, for example? How will the Minister ensure that all the north-east’s communities benefit from the celebrations? How will he work with other Departments to ensure that great engineering stories, such as those of Dorman Long and—this is particularly relevant on International Women in Engineering Day—of Dorothy Buchanan, are celebrated as part of the festivities? We want to inspire another generation of engineers, particularly women engineers, with our celebrations.”
“If this refurbishment does not happen and the bridge is allowed to continue in its current state of disrepair and neglect, I am afraid to say that it will become a different kind of symbol of the north-east. It will become a symbol of the neglect of the north-east, which has been forgotten by this Government—its great heritage and great future have been forgotten. What support does the Minister propose to offer my region for this momentous celebration? I do not suppose that the Minister can tell us the Communities Secretary’s response to our levelling-up fund application—although I would be very much pleased if he gave a certain yes—but does he agree that celebrations of such a national icon cannot be left simply to the local authority funds? Does he recognise that 10 years of austerity have slashed local government spending?”
“The Sydney Harbour bridge, on the other hand, is celebrated annually as the backdrop for the first fireworks display of each new year and had a large, organised 80th birthday celebration, with a special performance by musicians on the top of its 134 metre-high arch. The Tyne bridge, I am afraid to say, had nothing. The Government make much of their levelling-up agenda, yet the north seems to be forgotten when it comes to celebrating our communities. I have raised with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and the Department for International Trade that they only seem to use London images—red buses and Big Ben—to promote the United Kingdom abroad. Why not the Tyne bridge and the Angel of the North? Global Britain must mean global Britain including the north-east.”
“It represents our region nationally and globally. It is the familiar backdrop to the annual great north run, as 54,000 runners pass over the bridge, accompanied by a display from the Red Arrows. The bridge is also used for other large events, including hosting the rings for the 2012 Olympics, the 2015 rugby world cup, and, more recently, the 2019 European rugby champions cup final. It was the location for the amazing closing ceremony of Freedom City 2017, when we celebrated 50 years since Martin Luther King’s visit to our city, and also the closing ceremony of the Great Exhibition of the North. However, the sad fact is that the bridge’s last proper birthday celebrations were for its 75th birthday, hosted by local mayors from Gateshead and Newcastle.”