Derek Twigg
MP for Widnes and Halewood · Labour · United Kingdom
“Further education colleges play a crucial role in apprenticeships and in supporting education. Will the Minister tell me what extra measures the Government are bringing in to ensure that further education colleges naturally provide a wide range of education and technical skills to apprentices?”
“I will call Ben Obese-Jecty to move the motion and then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.”
“As I say, we have listened to the campaigners and the ISC has accepted a way forward that addresses the concerns raised in respect of the security services. However, I believe that could have been achieved much earlier, and I would like to make a few comments about that.”
“Our intelligence officers and agents do difficult and sometimes dangerous work so that we can live safely. They deserve our sincere thanks and praise for the job that they do and it is right that we hold them to the highest standards.”
“I speak from a unique position, in that I was at the Hillsborough disaster, I have worked closely with the Hillsborough families to obtain justice and there are families in my constituency who lost loved ones or were injured at the Hillsborough disaster and in the Manchester Arena bombing.”
“There has been a lack of direction and grip, with no one taking control. It seemed all too difficult for some, and that has caused the lengthy delays that we have endured. We should not ignore the fact that that has added to the anxiety and concerns of the families and campaigners.”
The complete record
Every one of 605 lines we hold for Derek Twigg, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“Because of the number of Members who have indicated that they wish to speak in the debate, with the authority of the Chairman of Ways and Means, I am imposing a time limit on Back Benchers’ contributions of two and a half minutes.”
“I remind Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister; I have not been notified of any such. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates. I am keen that all interventions should be kept short.”
“I remind hon. Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and from the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.”
“Paragraph 8 of the 4 August statement says: “It is important for me to emphasise…that the UK Government is committed to pursuing a positive relationship with China to strengthen understanding, cooperation and stability.” Why did the deputy National Security Adviser think it was a good idea to include that in the statement?”
“The NATO Parliamentary Assembly delegation—of which the right hon. Member for Wetherby and Easingwold (Sir Alec Shelbrooke), who is sat on the Opposition Front Bench, is deputy leader—met the Ukrainian delegation at the weekend and also heard from President Zelensky. The line that we heard time and again from them was about the need for more weapons, equipment and munitions, particularly deep-fire missiles and drone munitions. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. A lot has been said about the need to unfreeze Russian assets and use their full value. She said that work is being done on that. We in this House have on numerous occasions seen things happen quickly; things need to move at pace to ensure that the free industrial capacity that Ukraine still has, which can make those things, is funded and used as quickly as possible.”
“I welcome the Minister’s statement. Is this not another example that what Russia really believes in is the complete annihilation of Ukraine? It does not care what collateral damage it does elsewhere. I believe that sending drones across into Poland was a deliberate move by the Russians. I welcome the response from Poland and NATO, but do we not need to talk about ramping up industrial co-operation for Ukraine, so that it gets more and better munitions and equipment more quickly, and ramping up sanctions? With the Budget coming up, we need to consider how we ramp up defence expenditure, and further increase it beyond the recent targets set.”
“(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade to make a statement on the cyber-attack on Jaguar Land Rover and on what assistance the Government are giving to businesses to help protect them against cyber-attacks.”
“What are the Government doing to help protect our businesses from cyber-crime? I have heard what the Minister has said today, but it is in our national security interest for them to work closely with business. Is there an underlying weakness in how business is dealing with cyber-security? In that regard, we heard from Ciaran Martin, former head of the National Cyber Security Centre, on the “Today” programme this morning, suggesting that companies are perhaps focusing more on protecting customer data at the expense of the security of their operations. This House needs to hear more in the coming months about what the Government are doing to work with business and to help prevent these attacks being successful, because they are a threat to our economy and to national security.”
“Many of my constituents are employees, which is also the case for my neighbouring Merseyside MPs. Thousands of jobs in the supply chain have been affected. I am disappointed that despite the cyber-attack happening just over a week ago to one of our most important businesses, which has nearly 33,000 direct employees and, of course, a huge supply chain, no statement has been made to Parliament on what actions have been taken to help the company or to prevent future attacks. The latest attack raises wider issues following on from the attack on Marks & Spencer. The two instances in themselves are very worrying. One would like to believe that all companies reviewed their cyber-security after the M&S attack. If these attacks continue, there could be an ongoing and even more serious effect on our economy.”
“I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question—as a north-west MP, you know what a large employer JLR is in the region. As we have heard, this serious cyber-attack on Jaguar Land Rover has stopped production and halted sales, and staff have been instructed to stay at home. The car plants at Halewood in my constituency and in Solihull, and other production facilities around the world, have been unable to operate. From what has been reported, JLR shut down its IT systems in response to the attack. I believe that dealerships have been unable to register new cars and—initially, at least—garages that maintain JLR vehicles were unable to order the parts they needed. The JLR Halewood plant in my constituency is an important and valued employer.”
“Before I call Sir John Whittingdale, let me say that I do not intend to impose a time limit, but if you keep to about four minutes, we will get everybody in.”
“Before we come to the Front Bench contributions, we are due to finish at 4.30 pm. While there has not been a Division called yet, there is the potential of up to three votes in the main Chamber. If that happens, I will have to suspend for the duration of those three votes. I point that out to the Front Bench spokespersons before they start their wind-up speeches.”
“We are about to vote, so I would like to put the question as soon as we can, but it is up to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell).”
“I thank right hon. and hon. Members for their co-operation. Question put and agreed to . Resolved , That this House has considered the future of terrestrial television.”
“In previous Parliaments, progress was made with respect to the Hillsborough justice campaign when there was firm direction and action from Ministers, including from two previous Home Secretaries—the right hon. Alan Johnson and Baroness May of Maidenhead. They set up the independent panel and took action on its subsequent groundbreaking report. If there is a will, and direction and determination from Ministers, solutions can be found and barriers removed. There must be a duty of candour for civil servants and public servants, and parity of legal representation. Such a Bill could help to improve and repair public confidence in the Government.”
“—[ Official Report , 18 February 1998; Vol. 306, c. 1085.] The independent panel report and the subsequent inquest followed. How misspoken was that set of words in this House. That justifies why we need this change in law. We are again seeing continued delay. This a question of government machinery. As we have seen through the history of the campaign, delay has followed delay. There is often pushback from Whitehall and the wider public sector machine, finding problems but not solutions. It is a concern that there are issues that have not been resolved by now, and the continued delay breeds suspicion and distrust in the state’s ability to act competency and fairly. I do not doubt that there are legal matters that need addressing, but why have they not been resolved by now?”
“I congratulate my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), on his excellent speech. I was present in this House in 1998 when the then Home Secretary Jack Straw made a statement on the conclusions of the Justice Stuart-Smith review of the evidence and papers relating to the Hillsborough disaster, which I will quote. If anything, this justifies and underlines why we need this change in the law: “Taking those and all other considerations into account, the overall conclusion that Lord Justice Stuart-Smith reaches is that there is no basis for a further public inquiry. He also finds no basis for a renewed application to quash the verdict of the inquest, and he concludes that there is no material that should be put before the Director of Public Prosecutions or the police disciplinary”.”
“I welcome much of what the Minister has said. She said in the early part of her speech that there would be a duty of candour and legal aid for people, so can she be clear about why there is a delay? If that is what will be in the Bill, why is there a problem?”
“Order. If Members can keep their speeches to five or six minutes—we are doing okay—then everyone will get a chance to speak before the wind-ups.”
“I note that the shadow Secretary of State made great play of the changes and the extra safeguards that Ministers of the previous Government put in place following the breach. I also note that the Secretary of State said he had had to make more changes and introduce new software. That suggests to me that the changes put in place by the previous Government were not good enough. Can I ask him this clearly? Who had knowledge of this incident in the 18 months after the data breach had taken place before it reached Ministers? How were there no checks on anyone in the Department who had access to that sort of data to ensure they were using it properly?”
“I congratulate my right hon. Friend on her statement, and welcome the investments in transport. Let me take her back to the proposed Liverpool-Manchester railway line, because it is important that this delivers for my constituents in Widnes and Halewood. In her discussions with the Mayor of the Liverpool city region and other leaders in the area, will she bear in mind that one of the proposals is for a Liverpool Gateway station? Ditton in my constituency, which is the site of an oil station and has good links to both the west coast main line and the freight line, is ideally placed. Will she bear that in mind in any future discussions that she has with the Liverpool city region?”
“Order. I have been very generous, but the debate has a very narrow focus on advertising. I am sure that the shadow Minister understands that and will come back to that issue.”
“We already know that the Bill as published was flawed, because of the changes that have been made in the past few days and announced today. I welcome the wider review of PIP and the consultation with disabled people, their organisations and clinicians, but given the wider review and that the Timms review is yet to report, why are we pushing ahead at this stage?”
“I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, and echo his words about the courage and professionalism of our service personnel. It is good that everyone has returned safely. Having a strong and capable military is essential to ensuring our economic security and freedom of trade. Is that not why financial institutions and pension funds should increase their investment in defence industries, and not listen to voices opposed to that?”
“I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the work he has done to secure extra funding for defence and for Ukraine. It is clear that Putin does not want peace and that all he is interested in doing is gaining Ukrainian territory. We have to send a clear message to him that neither we nor our allies are taking a step backwards. The only way we can get a just settlement for Ukraine is for Ukraine to be as militarily powerful as possible to stop the Russians taking more territory. I welcome the efforts that have been made so far and the additional funding, but, as I have said before, we will have to increase defence spending further. The 3% will not be enough by the next election.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her statement; I know that she is doing all she can on the issue. We cannot have a defence industrial strategy unless we have our own primary steelmaking facilities, so clearly we cannot let these furnaces close. I was interested to hear what the Minister said about having various meetings in Whitehall and with the Treasury. When is she likely to be able to come back to the House and report on the progress made on this issue and, importantly, on a steel strategy for the long term—not just five or 10 years, but 20 years or more?”
“Can I ask the Leader of the House to talk to her Government colleagues to ensure that the duty of candour, parity of funding for families at inquest and other issues that we agreed on will be included in that Bill and that it will be published soon?”
“I refer the Leader of the House to the public office standards Bill, better known as the Hillsborough law, which is how I would like to refer to it. She will know my history in what happened at Hillsborough and, subsequently, with the independent panel report, and the involvement I had in the negotiations between Ministers, families and others. From what we are hearing, it seems that we are approaching a similar situation, where Whitehall is finding reasons to find problems with the law, rather than delivering it. It was only when we had the intervention of the then Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, and then Baroness May of Maidenhead, when she became Home Secretary, that we got things moving again.”
“Order. A lot of Members wish to speak and I will begin to call the Front Benchers no later than eight minutes past 5, so at the moment we are looking at roughly two minutes for each speech, but it may even be less than that. I will not waste any more time—I call Jim Shannon.”
“Order. I will extend the time limit to two and a half minutes. I will leave it as voluntary, but if hon. Members do not keep to it I will impose it.”
“The two Opposition spokespeople will have five minutes each. The Minister will have 10 minutes, and there will be a minute or two for the hon. Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) to wind up.”
“If the comments from across the Atlantic this week have reminded us of anything, it is that we should always keep at the forefront of our minds the bravery of our service personnel, not least in recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan when serving alongside the US and other allies. I therefore ask my right hon. Friend to find time on the Floor of the House for us to debate the bravery and sacrifices of our service personnel.”
“The Prime Minister’s actions this week demonstrated again why UK leadership in defence and security and on Ukraine is crucial. I also agree with him that it is important to strengthen our relationship with the United States. In the coming months, will he consider whether we should be proposing to hit 3% spending before the next election? We need to do what it takes.”
“Order. A lot of Members want to speak, so I will have to impose a time limit. I will first call Iain Duncan Smith, and then could Members bob for a few seconds longer than they would normally so that we can get everybody’s name on the list?”
“Order. Before I call Andrew Lewin, I will put an advisory two-minute limit on speeches. If that is not followed, I will impose a two-minute limit. I am sure colleagues will want to ensure that time is available for all others present.”
“I call Olivia Bailey to move the motion. I will then call the Minister to respond. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention in a 30-minute debate. I call Olivia Bailey.”
“Order. Before I call the Front-Bench spokespeople, I should say that I will call the Minister no later than 20 past. I call the Lib Dem spokesperson, Tim Farron.”
“I warmly welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, and particularly his commitment to accelerate the increase in defence spending, although I fear that we may have to visit the 3% target before the next Parliament. It is very important that we have a whole-society approach to defence. Will he be bringing forward a strategy to make that happen, particularly around the great need to improve our reservist forces?”
“The question of defence spending and GDP has been raised. I think it is clear from recent events that we cannot wait until 2030 to spend 2.5%, and, in fact, we should be exceeding that percentage. In the lead-up to any negotiations, it is essential for us to ensure that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position, including militarily. It is also essential for us to speed up our help and support as quickly as possible. I understand that the Ukrainian defence industrial base has the capacity to increase the production of weapons and equipment. Can we do more to get funding to it to ensure that that happens? Our current problem is that our own industrial base cannot gear up quickly enough.”
“As someone who lost his wife to cancer, I know the dire circumstances that a cancer diagnosis can bring. It is right that cancer plans should focus on the best outcomes: improving the amount of time that people live for, or having a cure. I would like to raise with the Minister the specific issue of pain relief management. As part of the plan, will he ensure that there is an investigation into how pain relief management can be improved for cancer patients, and that it is given not just during the week but at weekends too?”
“It is interesting that Members on the Opposition Front Bench seem to have forgotten that when they left office, they left us with the smallest Army since Napoleonic times, a lack of ships and aeroplanes, some of the poorest equipment and many problems with procurement. It is important that we keep to the timetable on the SDR, but given the rumours we are hearing and the stories in the press, will the Minister provide an assurance that he will keep this House fully informed on progress on the SDR, not provide that information through the press?”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on an excellent statement. He will know that the Committee, of which I was part in the previous Parliament, was able to visit Japan and Italy, where we saw for ourselves the tremendous enthusiasm for the project and how they wanted to work very closely with us. At the end of the statement, my hon. Friend rightly touched on the importance of the workforce, but this project is also crucial to the future defence industrial base, is it not?”
“Following on from a previous question, clearly, the previous Government did delay investing in and starting up more nuclear power opportunities and options. What progress has been made since this Government came into power on plans to take forward nuclear power as part of our supply?”
“Friend, and ensured that we got the report out in a timely manner. My hon. Friend probably knows what issues I will raise. First, on AI, the defence field is moving so rapidly; it changes almost by the week. Does she agree that it is important that the MOD and those involved in defence harness that change quickly, keep on top of it, and ensure that we lead the field in AI, rather than following all the time? Also, I recall a discussion that we had about the importance of harnessing the talent and potential of SMEs and start-ups. We should ensure that the UK uses that potential for the benefit of our armed forces, to develop the best possible defence for our country. I would be grateful if my hon. Friend responded to those points.”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on an excellent report, and on the leadership that she has shown throughout—in dealing with witnesses, considering the evidence that came forward, and compiling the report. As she said, she worked closely with, and was given great help, by our excellent staff on the Defence Committee. I served on that Committee in the last Parliament, and it was probably the best Committee that I have been on, thanks to the commitment and knowledge of defence issues of those involved, including my hon. Friend; we were able to put that to good use. She said that despite differences between parties, the Committee was united in taking issues forward and holding Ministers to account. I am sure the new Committee will do exactly the same. It is great that the new Chair is present to support my hon.”
“As my right hon. Friend will know, a large number of elderly people are admitted to hospital, through A&E, with respiratory conditions. What plans does he have to strengthen the community respiratory teams, who do a great deal of good work but could do more work, if they had the resources, to prevent admission, and certainly readmission?”
“Those of us who have spoken to the American military know the importance of this base. Will the Minister confirm that he said that, since the agreement was announced, the American military and security services have raised no concerns with this Government?”
“Those needing to know in what state the last Government left the armed forces should look at the report on readiness for war by the Defence Committee, on which there was a Conservative majority. I really welcome the Secretary of State’s statement, particularly on waste and on the recruitment and retention of key people in the armed forces. However, on the issue of defence reform, can I ask him whether in the few months he has been in the job he feels that the MOD is fit for purpose? Is it agile and adaptable enough for the modern, oncoming threats we face?”
“Order. If hon. Members can keep speeches to not more than four minutes—that precedent has been set well so far—I will not have to impose a time limit at this stage. Interventions will obviously extend the limit.”
“I thank Members for their co-operation in terms of the time they are taking for their speeches. I say to the Front-Bench speakers that I am keen that the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) should get a chance at the end of the debate to wind up for a minute or so.”