Rebecca Long Bailey
MP for Salford · Labour · United Kingdom
“It cannot be right to continue to place significant burdens on the shoulders of volunteer leaseholders, especially in buildings owned by leaseholders, which were ruled out of the leaseholder protections.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, I place on record my special thanks to two special individuals: Darren Matthews and Mandy Sandhu. They were the first residents to come to me about the building safety crisis and a building called Transport House.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“First, they should co-ordinate with the Chancellor—we have the Budget tomorrow, so they will have to get in quick—to reverse the cuts and invest in the future of fire and rescue services with additional central Government funding.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister and the Secretary of State will both know that Salford has had a large number of buildings affected by the building safety crisis.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That has resulted in situations where vehicles are sometimes sent out without a full complement of five firefighters riding, where vehicles are deployed elsewhere to compensate for equipment or staffing gaps, or where vehicles simply cannot be deployed at all due to there not being enough staff to crew or repair them.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yet it is worrying, given that we know that the auditing of assessments at DRC buildings is very thin on the ground in practice, and as End Our Cladding Scandal notes, there is a raft of conclusions “based on assumption rather than test evidence.” Worse still, we know that enforcement is weak.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,995 held · 600 searchable for Rebecca Long Bailey. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“The link between radiation and illness is now well established. In 2007, genetic research found that nuclear victims had the same rate of DNA damage as clean-up workers at Chernobyl. In 2011, a Ministry of Defence health study found that 83% of survivors had between one and nine chronic health conditions, and further surveys of nuclear veterans report that miscarriage rates are three times higher among their wives and that their children have 10 times the usual number of birth defects. However, despite the clear health risks and the apparent causal links to the conditions experienced by many nuclear testing veterans, very few war pensions are approved unless veterans can clearly show information proving risk and the impact on health.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The issue is relevant to the current health concerns of many veterans and their descendants and the treatment they need for anaemia, leukaemia and rare genetic conditions. That is why it is so important for them to access the information urgently. As the Minister will know, nuclear testing veterans first raised the issue of health problems in 1983. In 1985, the then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, ordered a health study by the National Radiological Protection Board, which in 1988 reported that there was a “slight risk” of veterans getting leukaemia. The report was only seven pages long, and it was criticised by veterans as a whitewash. It was repeated, with similar results, in 1993 and 2003. Further, it has been reported in recent days that the 1988 scientific report was altered on the instruction of officials.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered nuclear test veterans and medical records. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning, Mr Vickers. British nuclear test veterans have now rightly received medallic recognition for their service, and for that I am very grateful to the Government, but the Minister must know that behind their proud smiles, those veterans are really struggling. They—and sometimes their wives, widows and descendants—have reported making repeated requests to gain access to the results of their blood or urine testing samples which they recall being taken during the nuclear testing programme. Sadly, many confirm that their service medical records do not include the test results, and they just do not understand why.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For example, in 2018 it was stated that: “The Ministry of Defence is unable to locate any information that suggests that Atomic Weapons Research Establishment staff took blood samples for radiological monitoring at the tests.” Then in November last year, it was stated that: “The Atomic Weapons Establishment holds copies of the results of urine radioactivity measurements and blood tests for a small number of individuals where these were included in scientific documentation on the nuclear weapons trials.” In December last year, the opposite was again indicated: “We would also like to take this opportunity to confirm that AWE does not hold the medical records or the results of blood and urine tests for current or ex-servicemen.” That merry-go-round of confusion goes round and round, month after month, with every question asked and response received.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister might be as perplexed as I am as to the location of such sample results and why they have not been released to veterans. Indeed, the Government’s responses to such questions over the last few years have certainly sown a great deal of confusion.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, the Minister will be aware of a freedom of information request made to the Atomic Weapons Establishment in September that uncovered a list of 150 documents currently held by the AWE. Three are in the public domain, but the remainder are not. These documents include titles such as “Blood Examinations Personnel Proceeding to Christmas Island”; “Message from AWRE Christmas Island To AWRE Aldermaston reference Blood Count Irregularities from”, and the rest is redacted; “Blood Counts at Maralinga”; and “Dose Record Grapple Z—record of 4 urine samples”. There are many more documents referred to in a similar vein. Again, these documents seem to clearly point to the existence of blood and urine test results.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They show that pathologists attached to the weapons trials were told to create a “special health register” to log the data. There are countless other documents ordering the testing of servicemen at various nuclear trials. It seems clear that blood and urine tests were routine, that they existed as formal documentation and, indeed, that a register and master record were kept; yet to my knowledge the register and master record have not been released, nor has specific documentation relating to each individual, bar one or two exceptions. It should also be noted that thousands of the released documents relating to this period reference the AB and ES series of files, which I understand were withdrawn from the National Archives for a security review in 2018, with no expected date of return.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They highlight a range of pertinent references that suggest blood and urine test data was collected from servicemen and that this information was stored and analysed. For example, documents show that the MOD had a director of hygiene and research who organised blood tests of personnel and kept a “master record” of results. They note orders from the Air Ministry and War Office telling unit medical officers to arrange repeated “blood testing of personnel working regularly with radioactive sources”. They detail the medical forms used and the instructions on how to duplicate and store them. They point to Army blood tests being copied from Atomic Weapons Research Establishment records to be put in soldiers’ main medical files.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When he asked for details of the blood test, he was told: “Everything you have received was all that was held in your Army personnel and medical file.” John’s story is matched by countless similar battles for test and medical information by other nuclear veterans. My first simple question to the Minister is this: were blood and urine samples taken from nuclear testing veterans, and was a record kept of those samples? To help in his analysis, I will share with him the information that I am aware has been archived on this basis so far. First, there are publicly available documents—limited documents, notes, forms, official instructions and guidance—that are accessible in the National Archives.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They were then hit with a flash 1,000 times brighter than the sun. His hands became an X-ray, as he could see every bone and every joint, and he was then hit with the heat blast. It was so intense that the palm trees scorched, as did the men’s backs. On his return from service, John’s first-born son tragically died suddenly at four months old due to birth defects that John believes were linked to radiation. John himself has since been diagnosed with cancer, and at age 26 he developed pernicious anaemia, a blood disorder linked to radiation. John gave multiple blood samples during his service, but they cannot be found on his main medical records.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, and I agree with his comments. It is not just physical conditions that impacted on these veterans; there were indeed profound mental health concerns reported afterwards as a result of what they experienced. My constituent’s grandad, John Morris, is just one nuclear testing veteran who has suffered and who has been trying to locate the relevant information so that he can apply for a war pension. He was a Royal Engineer and served on Operation Grapple on Christmas Island, and he witnessed four nuclear explosions. He told me that one day he and his colleagues were told to sit in the open air with their backs to the explosion. Shorts and shirts were the norm, but on this day they were told to wear Army-issued sunglasses and find a cloth to put over their eyes.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If I have one request for the Minister today, it is to give those men and their families the medical information that they need, while they are still alive. They simply need to know where their test sample data is. I say to the Minister this. If it is not available, be open: explain what happened to it, when it happened, why it happened and on whose instruction.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He will be aware that many blood and urine test samples were taken under old Air Ministry orders and that the AWRE was not legally required in 1959 to share or disclose documents on request, as would be the case under current legislation. Can he confirm that those historical records are being searched when a subject access, FOI or similar search request is received? The fact remains that blood and urine test samples were taken from many servicemen at nuclear test sites and the archive documentation suggests that they were formally documented, so what happened to the documents? Where are they now, and why in so many cases are nuclear veterans and their families unable to access their personal medical data? That data is vital for their war pension applications and for an understanding of the conditions that they suffer.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In response to a recent question to the Defence Secretary, I was informed that all classified documents retained by the Ministry of Defence under a Lord Chancellor’s instruction or a national security exemption are still available to be searched on request. If they are indeed searchable, despite being withheld documents, can the Minister confirm that the person making the relevant search request will be notified that that information is being withheld and will be given the reasons why? Is the Minister specifically aware of any blood test and urine sample information that is being withheld under a Lord Chancellor’s instruction or a national security exemption?”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That may of course be the case, but for that data even to exist in the first place, the sample results had to come first, so what happened to them? I truly intend to be helpful to the Minister in getting to the bottom of this puzzle. I have no doubt that he wants to help veterans and their families to receive the information that they need. To that end, I have a number of questions that I would like him to answer. First, can the Minister review the security classification for the 150 FOI documents that I have mentioned, so that they can be released for public view? Will he release the AB and ES series of files and, if not, explain to the House why they are to be withheld?”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I know his constituent very well: he is a very lovely man and has fought long and hard to achieve recognition for veterans and their families and descendants. Unfortunately, veterans themselves have not undergone an extensive health study into the effects of the radiation to which they were exposed, let alone their descendants in relation to the impact on future family members. The Government certainly need to address that to give people such as Steve the certainty that he will receive the support that he requires if it is needed in the future. At the moment, he is not receiving such support, sadly. The Minister himself has stated that it is likely that the blood tests are simply categorised in scientific data at the AWE.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and for all the work that she has done over the years to support nuclear test veterans. They are very appreciative of her efforts. On her point about transparency, that is the key to today’s debate. All that these men are asking for is the truth. They want to know where their test results are and if they cannot access them, they want to know why. They deserve nothing less than the truth for the service they have provided to this country. I hope the Minister will do all he can to honour their requests.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, they found excessive radiation in nuclear testing veterans, and that it had overall implications for their health over time. I have no doubt that the Minister’s intentions in this debate are very honourable, but he made some confusing comments. For example, he stated that the Atomic Weapons Establishment does not hold any medical records—that is his firm belief—but he went on to say, in response to the question about the 150 documents that were referenced in the freedom of information request, that test information was in there, and was provided to the next of kin. That suggests to me that the AWE did hold test information on individuals, and that as a result of the FOI request, it had to issue those results to a veteran’s next of kin. Would the Minister like to respond on that point?”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Various colleagues made references to the compensation and support provided to other countries’ nuclear testing veterans; for example, in America, nuclear testing veterans have received a day of recognition, medical care, compensation and access to their full medical and testing records. The hon. Member for Walthamstow (Stella Creasy) talked about the need for an inquiry, not only for testing veterans, but for their descendants. In the UK, we have never had a detailed health study or research project into the effect of radiation on nuclear testing veterans and their descendants. The Minister made reference to a number of papers that were produced, but the veterans were not provided with the full suite of information required to determine what outcome was needed. Indeed, international studies have come to different conclusions.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank everybody for their contribution to today’s debate, which has been very good and collegiate. I extend special thanks to the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes). It is very rare to make good friends with someone on the opposite Benches, but he and I have been very friendly and active on the issue of nuclear testing veterans; he has done long-running work over the years as a champion of those veterans. He said that although we may have been united in our campaigning activities, the Governments over the decades have not been united, or have been united only in their failure to recognise what testing veterans suffered.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Veterans have been campaigning for access to their records for over 70 years. He said that many of the documents will be in paper form, and that there might not be an auditable trail. I find it very hard to believe that in one of the greatest militaries in the world, there would not be a system for accessing particular documents. Will he look into that as a matter of urgency, and perhaps conduct an inquiry on the location of those historical documents and report back to the House? As I said in my opening remarks, if the documents do not exist and he knows that they do not exist, it is up to the Government to be open and honest, and to explain what happened to the documents, on whose instruction they were destroyed, and why. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered nuclear test veterans and medical records.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate the honesty of the Minister’s response, but I am sure he can understand the frustration in this debate, and of course in the wider country. Every response that we receive is different. One suggests that there are medical records; the other suggests that there are not. We just want to know the truth. I understand that he has undertaken to review the 150 FOI-request documents, which is very much appreciated. Perhaps he will report his findings to the House, but there are numerous other documents that we know exist—for example, the AB and ES files that have been withdrawn from the National Archives. If he could commit to putting those in the public domain again, we would be grateful. As for other documents that may or may not be available, the Minister referenced the fact that the documents are very old.”
House of Commons28 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the issue of clarity, the Minister knows that the final offer mechanism should be an issue of last resort, and before that there should be a mechanism by which negotiations can take place. Can he assure the House that there will be a mechanism to ensure that big tech firms do not drag out negotiations unnecessarily, because it is not clear so far?”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They should listen to calls from the Royal College of Nursing to forgive tuition debt for all current nursing and midwifery students and to abolish self-funded tuition fees for all future nursing, midwifery and allied health students. That must be accompanied by a package for students, including a living costs grant that reflects the true cost of living and access to hardship payments. To keep those staff, the Government must listen to the alarm bells being rung by the NHS workforce, who do not want to take strike action but are simply desperate. Pay them properly and fund their services.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although an additional £2.4 billion is to be provided to cover training costs for the first five years of the 15-year plan, no estimate has been put forward of total additional running costs beyond that for the hundreds of thousands of extra workers the plan says will be needed by 2036-37. The Government may refer to the education pipeline, but for every burned-out experienced nurse who leaves the profession, it takes at least three years to educate a new nurse. It has been estimated that one in three nurses leave their course citing financial challenges and poor support as reasons for leaving, and trainee doctors report feeling burned out. Clearly, the Government need to take urgent action to increase the numbers of those training in NHS professions.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is no surprise that we are hearing these stories, as the Government have chronically underfunded NHS maternity services—a commitment to only one third of the funding recommended by the Health and Social Care Committee was made recently. Of course, the Government will say that they are responding to the staffing crisis and will cite their NHS workforce plan, but the Public Accounts Committee has criticised the plan heavily in a new report. In particular, it has criticised the lack of funding estimates and raised concerns about how the plan will be achieved.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Even when they reach these services, which are miles away from their home, resource pressures and reduced staffing appear to be negatively impacting the remaining services at other locations. One mother explained the situation to me: “I have recently given birth to my third child and the deterioration of services is shocking and has caused significant trauma to myself and my family... I experienced medical negligence, epistemic and testimonial injustice and disability discrimination throughout pregnancy, birth and in the postnatal period”. Unfortunately, that mother’s story is not a one-off. Make Birth Better estimates that about 200,000 people a year find some aspect of giving birth traumatic, yet 30% of new parents suffering from mental and/or physical trauma after giving birth do not feel they are being supported.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Ingleside birth and community centre is a freestanding midwife-led birth centre for antenatal and post-natal care, as well as low-risk birthing. It is situated in the middle of the beautiful Oakwood park in Salford. This state-of-the-art facility was opened a few years ago to address the absence of local maternity services after the closure of the maternity unit at Salford Royal Hospital in 2011. Sadly, because of a midwife shortage, the facility has been closed since the pandemic, leaving Salford residents, families, new parents and their new-born babies without access to maternity services in the city. New parents and their new-born babies are forced to travel many miles across Greater Manchester to access these services.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The position for midwives is equally dire, and midwifery now makes up a smaller slice of the NHS workforce than at any time on record. There is a big difference between the English regions, too. In the 12 months to July 2023, the number of midwives in the east of England rose by almost 9%, but in the north-west the number rose by just over 1%. The Nursing and Midwifery Council has said: “There are clear warnings workforce pressures are driving people away.” It found that 27,000 professionals had left the register in the UK in the year to the end of March 2023 and that although retirement was the most common reason for leaving, the next most common reason was health and exhaustion. The real-world consequences of this crisis in midwifery are being felt in Salford.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“At the time, both the Royal College of Nursing and the British Medical Association warned that staffing levels were not meeting patient demand and that this was putting patient safety at risk. Further, the Royal College of Nursing stated that nursing staff were leaving the profession “in droves”, often because the stress and demands of the job do not match their current pay levels. It said that one nurse can be left looking after 10, 15 or even more patients. Those ratios are unsafe and require urgent action from the Government. There is also a two-tier system for nursing staff, with different pay for the same job, as there is no parity of pay, terms and conditions across all the sectors in which nurses work.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Well, the big flagship policy seems to be the Offshore Petroleum Licensing Bill, which completely undermines the Government’s so-called commitment to net zero. Staggeringly, even the Government admit that the Bill will do nothing to bring down household bills. The King’s Speech also talked about implementing minimum service levels. Of course, this was a reference to underpaid and, frankly, burned-out public sector workers striking for fair pay and adequate funding for their services, which are in a state of acute crisis. The irony is that the Government cannot deliver minimum service levels on a day-to-day basis in the NHS because of chronic underfunding and underpay, never mind on strike days. I wish to elaborate on the staffing crisis within the NHS. More than 112,000 vacancies were recorded across NHS England in March.”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker). The King’s Speech was more notable for what was not in it. On the day, critics called it the “all mouth and no trousers” speech. In fact, it had the fewest Bills in a monarch’s speech since 2014. People in my Salford constituency looked at it and wondered, “What is in it to make my life better? What is there to help with the cost of living? What is there to support public services, to improve our broken public transport system or to address the NHS crisis?” Sadly, the answer was nothing. The mental health Bill was abandoned yet again, despite being a manifesto promise in 2017 and 2019, and despite there being a clear mental health crisis. There was no conversion therapy ban, despite it being promised repeatedly by the Government. What was actually in the King’s Speech?”
House of Commons13 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I heard stories about how horrified those young people were when the Prime Minister made certain statements during his conference speech, and how in some cases those young people felt they had no place in the world. Some had even considered suicide. The Government must understand that their words have an impact, not just on increases in hate crime but on the mental health of the people they affect. We have a moral duty in this place to speak up for those we feel are disenfranchised, and we have a moral duty to choose our words carefully. I am proud that Britain is a tolerant, respectful and inclusive country but, as the charity Stonewall states, “a lack of positive action and threats to existing rights are taking the UK off course.” We cannot allow that to happen.”
House of Commons18 October 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) for securing this important debate and for his passionate speech, which I associate myself with very much. The statistics that my hon. Friend set out were absolutely shocking, but they are only the reported crimes. As we know, only one in 10 LGBTQ+ people report hate crimes or incidents. It is even more worrying and upsetting that over recent months we have seen Government spokespeople specifically using trans people—who already struggle against prejudice day in, day out—as a political football, for no reason other than stoking a culture war. The Government’s words matter. I met a group of parents of trans young people in Salford on Sunday. The Government’s words mattered to them, and they mattered to the young people.”
House of Commons18 October 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q13. The Prime Minister will be delighted to know that nuclear veterans like my constituent’s grandad, John, are starting to receive the medals he promised, but John is still not getting his full medical records. His blood tests from Christmas Island, which are crucial to claiming a war pension, are missing, and countless veterans report the same. As the Ministry of Defence has admitted that it holds at least 150 files withheld from national archives referring to blood test and other data, will he review those documents, report back to the House and hold a public inquiry into why medical record omissions have happened, and on whose instruction?”
House of Commons18 October 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While it is welcome that it has been reported today that RAAC has not been found in any of our schools in Salford, I must stress that the fact that the Government were unable to produce that information until today, having known about the risk since at least 2018, when a school roof in Kent collapsed, is completely unacceptable.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It stated clearly that the DfE had received significantly less funding for school buildings than it estimated it needed between 2016 and 2023. The Government knew that this crisis was coming, and the causes of this crisis were very deliberate. Austerity is, was and always will be a political choice, but it is both immoral and economically illiterate. The only political choice the Government should have made was to ensure the safety of their people. Sadly, if they had made that choice, the cost borne then would be a mere shadow of the cost required today.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Then the story becomes even more absurd: in March 2022, realising that there was a problem, the Department for Education sent a questionnaire to all schools asking if they had RAAC on their estate, but later told schools not to spend any money on surveys to find out. Even after that, in May 2022, when Government documents were leaked to The Observer showing that school buildings could be a risk to life—causing great alarm in schools up and down the country—half the schools then applied for funding to remediate and did not get a penny from Government. In June 2023, the National Audit Office said the condition of school buildings was “declining” and warned that 700,000 pupils were learning in buildings that it described as unsafe or ageing.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sadly, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies states: “The current crisis illustrates just how costly failing to keep on top of necessary investment in buildings and infrastructure can be.” How much money was actually required, had the Government taken action on schools when it should have? The National Audit Office in 2017 published a report on capital spending that stated that it would cost £6.7 billion to return all schools to a satisfactory or better condition. That report was also clear that there is a significant risk of major costs arising from deterioration of the estate. Action was needed in 2017, but in November 2020, in the Government spending review, they allocated only £3.1 billion—less than half the amount of investment required just to keep buildings ticking over safely.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Worse still, there appears to be an emerging message today from Government that this crisis is stand-alone—that it is simply a sad indictment of less-regulated old building practices that are now outdated. That is not the true story. The real culprit here is the unashamed pursuit of austerity by this Government and the coalition before them. Let us not forget that, to start with, the coalition ripped up Labour’s Building Schools for the Future programme in 2010 and never adequately replaced it. Worse still, between 2009 and 2022 the Department for Education’s capital spending declined by 37% in cash terms and 50% in real terms. That is in addition to NHS and local authority budgets being slashed on a similar basis, with the effect that most ongoing public sector estate upgrade programmes were torn to shreds.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree with my constituency neighbour. I stress that not just schools are affected by this crisis; it extends to public buildings, and concerns have been raised in recent days by the building industry that certain residential properties, particularly social housing, could also be affected. On hospitals alone, a report by the National Audit Office in July this year said that structurally unsound RAAC was present in at least 41 hospitals. The Turnberg building at Salford Royal Hospital is reported to be one of them. Despite this clear national building safety crisis, there is no detail from Government on what action will or will not be taken, no detail on the urgent funding and support that will be provided to remediate and no assurances so far that the costs will not come out of existing school, NHS and local authority budgets.”
House of Commons6 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Water companies were sold with no debt when they were privatised in 1989. In fact, they were given a £1.5 billion green dowry by the Government. Since then, they have taken on borrowing of £60.6 billion, diverting income from customer bills to paying dividends and interest payments. As a result, water bills have increased by upwards of 40% in real terms. Does the Minister honestly think that consumers hail privatisation as a success?”
House of Commons28 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A nuclear testing veteran has said: “We have heard it all before, governments come and go, but the Nuclear Veterans keep fighting, that’s exactly what we did for our country all them years ago, so please, no more false promises just action…award us our medal”. He speaks for the thousands who were promised medallic recognition by the Prime Minister on 22 November last year. Sadly, they are now informed that the medal has been delayed again by the Government. What is the delay? Why is it happening? Will the Minister categorically promise the House today that those veterans, whose average age is now 85, will finally be awarded their medals before Remembrance Sunday so that they and their descendants can proudly wear them?”
House of Commons26 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In a more recent case, journalists at Vice UK faced statutory redundancy terms, with many having to leave with almost nothing because the company filed for bankruptcy, while its recent global CEO was on an annual salary of $1.5 million. It is not just workers who lose out in these situations. Figures disclosed in response to written parliamentary questions tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Justin Madders) indicate that over the last two years alone statutory redundancy payments cost the taxpayer around £300 million. If the law is not clear enough on the point at which creditors’ interests in an insolvency should be prioritised, what other mechanisms are there to sound the alarm?”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The workers were left waiting for weeks without any source of income, obliged to depend on family and friends or use food banks in the resulting emergency, and they included one who was fighting leukaemia. A not dissimilar instance occurred at Orchard House Foods in Gateshead, with redundancy negotiations over the site’s closure seeing the company fail to pay workers ahead of the Christmas period. Sadly, that practice does not just plague the food sector; it is increasingly evident across the wider economy. Thomas Cook, for example, also failed abjectly to consult over redundancies prior to insolvency, when it was known for some time that the company was in trouble.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bakers Food and Allied Workers Union highlights the cases of Dawnfresh Seafoods and Orchard House Foods, which it says “raise significant concerns about the ability of business owners to abuse the process around administration and insolvency, leaving workers in the lurch and denying them the full value of their outstanding pay and redundancy monies owed—whilst Directors walk away with impunity, often with enormous levels of wealth intact.” In the case of Dawnfresh, the union reports that the director allowed workers to carry on overtime shifts in full knowledge that he was about to bring in the receivers. He also took the opportunity before insolvency to rescue his own private art collection from company premises.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the London Solicitors Litigation Association noted, “the precise point in time at which the duty will be triggered and how to balance creditors’ interests with other competing interests of the business remains relatively elusive.” It is that elusiveness that continues to allow some directors to act in a way that is detrimental to workers and other creditors.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I suggest that that is because the bar for disqualification for unfit conduct is very high and often difficult to prove, particularly where a director can claim to have relied on the advice of external advisers when making decisions. Further, the law surrounding whether directors have acted inappropriately in an insolvency situation, and specifically the point at which directors should begin to consult on redundancies and prioritise payments to creditors prior to insolvency, is ambiguous to say the least. The Supreme Court recently affirmed that ambiguity in the case of BTI v. Sequana, noting that company directors are only required to begin prioritising creditors if it is probable that their company will plunge into insolvency. The problem is that no one knows what “probable” actually means.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the Unite the union has stated, “In the end, four Carillion executives were fined £870,000 in total – a mere slap on the wrist given the hundreds of millions of pounds the company lost and the thousands of lives they ruined.” Former BBC investigative journalist Bob Wylie, who wrote the Financial Times book of the year “Bandit Capitalism: Carillion and the Corruption of the British State”, summed up the present position perfectly when he said: “The sad truth is they get away with it because they know they can.” The most recent figures by the Insolvency Service for 2022-23 show that almost half of disqualifications were because of misuse or abuse of the bounce back loan scheme, rather than more robust action being taken against directors for unfit conduct prior to insolvency.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered insolvency law and director disqualifications. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Fovargue. Thank you for making time for this important debate. Five years ago, Carillion collapsed in one of the biggest corporate scandals seen in recent years. Millions were racked up in debt, tens of thousands of workers lost their jobs and pensions, and thousands of supply chain businesses were put at risk, all because the auditors failed to hold Carillion’s board to account and a blind eye was turned to poor corporate behaviour. Five years on, have changes to the UK corporate governance regime been made to ensure that such a scandal cannot happen again? The answer, sadly, is not encouraging.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗