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 8 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.
“If not, can he explain clearly the Government’s reasons for avoiding that in favour of more diluted and legally unenforceable guidance? It is clear that the current UK corporate governance regime has become dysfunctional, ambiguous and unenforceable. Despite numerous scandals, it still has no room for the protection of employees and other stakeholders. I hope the Minister can reassure me today that things will change. Thank you for the opportunity to hold this debate, Ms Fovargue.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That would provide much-needed clarity on when a duty to consult on redundancies is triggered, and when payments to workers and creditors need to be prioritised over shareholder dividend extraction. Thirdly, will the Minister comment on why the Government proposals made in recent years to introduce workers on boards have been shelved? Will he commit to examine and develop policy in the light of the experience of other European jurisdictions, where direct representations of employees on both unitary and two-tier boards has actually helped to improve corporate performance and success, for the benefit of all stakeholders? Last, will he introduce clear Sarbanes-Oxley-equivalent legislation that would finally make directors legally responsible for financial reporting governance?”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given these glaring deficiencies in the law, I will be grateful if the Minister considers some simple legislative changes that would provide much-needed clarity and protect workers, creditors, and the long-term health of companies. First, will he widen the scope of directors’ duties in section 172 of the Companies Act 2006, so that a duty is not owed solely to shareholders, as at present, but is owed to workers and other stakeholders as well? That must sit alongside a clear duty to prioritise the long-term welfare of a company, rather than simply the short-term maximisation of shareholder dividends. Secondly, with regard to the duties of directors prior to insolvency, will the Government legislate to set clear definitions and parameters for when insolvency is deemed to be a “probable” event?”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sadly, even the chief executive of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales believes that the Government’s White Paper proposals on reform of the audit industry do not go far enough, stating: “Taking these measures as a package with the draft audit reform Bill outlined, the government's approach has a half-hearted and lopsided feel to it… Lessons from Carillion and other recent company failures have been ignored, with little emphasis now on tightening internal controls and modernising corporate governance.” A further five years on from Carillion, we are no closer to the creation of the Government’s long-promised audit, reporting and governance authority, or the passing of the Government’s promised audit reform Bill. When we can expect legislation on audit reform and the creation of ARGA?”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, what is glaringly absent from the Government’s White Paper proposals so far is a statutory and enforceable Sarbanes-Oxley equivalent, which would make directors legally responsible for financial reporting governance. Instead, the White Paper opts for the fluffier “encouragement” of boards to include in their annual reports declarations about whether internal risk management and internal controls are effective or not. Similarly, the provisions that recommend that certain minimum clawback conditions or “trigger points” are included in directors’ remuneration arrangements are welcome in principle, but the reality is that these employment contracts are not publicly available so as to enable enforcement, and annual financial reports rarely provide comprehensive information.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, it is important to note that although the code is underpinned by listing rules that require premium-listed companies to “comply or explain” if they have not complied with a code provision, there is no strict legal requirement to comply with the code at all. It is merely a guidebook, and the lack of legal enforceability is clear. The Financial Times reported only last month that the FRC has reported falling levels of compliance since 2020, suggesting that boards are willing to risk avoiding the “comply or explain” requirements, particularly as the ultimate threat is simply to register dissatisfaction in a non-binding shareholder vote, or one that historically the company has a vanishingly small chance of losing.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In this dysfunctional culture, firms must win and retain engagements from companies in order to generate revenue, but simultaneously they must objectively scrutinise the company reports of the very people they are trying to win business from. Indeed, the symptoms of this flawed culture are clear. The Financial Reporting Council has stated that 29% of the audits delivered by the seven biggest accounting firms fail to meet UK standards. It is abundantly clear that the UK corporate governance regime is in urgent need of reform What actions have the Government taken so far? In his response to the debate, the Minster will no doubt refer to the Government’s White Paper on reforms to the UK corporate governance code, which the FRC is consulting upon as we speak.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for his comments and I agree completely. There are huge issues surrounding the area of pre-pack administrations and the issue of phoenix companies, whereby directors are allowed to reappear in another form with the same kind of company structure with complete impunity. This certainly needs to be addressed by the Government. Other mechanisms exist to sound the alarm on poor corporate governance. That is usually when the role of auditors should be key, but in recent years the unhealthy structure of the industry has been widely criticised, as well as the market dominance and conflicts of interest of the big accountancy firms.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think it is unreasonable to expect directors to have that legal liability. Finally, on the audit system, the Minister has not provided any clarity about when ARGA will be set up, when audit reforms will be forthcoming or how extensive they will be. We got a taster in the Queen’s Speech, but as I am sure he agrees, reforms need to go a lot further than what the Government have put forward, because issues arise time and again. If we look at the dysfunctionality of the audit industry, KPMG was fined £14 million for not auditing Carillion’s company accounts correctly, and that was not a one-off. Prem Sikka referred to the case of Silentnight, in which KPMG—again, in the pursuit of a coveted client—did a pre-pack administration and sold a company to that potential client at an undervalue. It was fined £13 million for its role in that.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the issue of Sarbanes-Oxley, the Minister said that there is a balance to be struck, and he implied that by introducing legal requirements on directors in the style of Sarbanes-Oxley, we would in some way restrict entrepreneurship. That has certainly not been the case in the United States. I was reading a Harvard law report this morning that suggested the opposite—that providing certainty to shareholders and investors would actually encourage future investment. Directors should be able to say, “Yes, all the financial statements we are making are 100% correct. We are categorically supportive of the work that our auditors have done, and we’re happy to provide those reports to our shareholders.” If they cannot do that, we have a serious problem with our UK corporate governance regime.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I applaud the work of the Insolvency Service, but it can only examine conduct as determined under the current law. Take a situation where directors could have consulted on redundancies prior to an insolvency event but did not. The law is very weak and ambiguous on that, which is the point I was trying to make in my opening remarks. As the Sequana case clearly shows, the point at which an insolvency becomes probable is not defined in law. There is a point in time when directors should be, on a sliding scale, prioritising the interests of creditors prior to a probable insolvency. Defining that is crucial to providing the protection that workers and creditors deserve in situations where some of the money they are owed could be paid back to them.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank everybody for taking part in the debate, which has been wide-ranging; a lot of interesting points were raised. I thank the Minister for his lengthy response. I welcome a lot of the comments he made, and I followed his work as a Back Bencher on this issue, so I know we are on the same page on many issues, but I am saddened that he did not go into the level of detail that many of the questions asked by myself and colleagues required. The vast majority of directors do the right thing—we wholeheartedly agree on that point—but the problem is that when the minority do not and it goes seriously wrong, the Insolvency Service and the UK corporate governance code only work to a certain point, because the enforceability just is not there.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is 100% right. I hope the Minister will come back with plans for more detailed reforms of the audit industry in due course. I will finish on the point about the three reports that my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) mentioned. Lord Sikka provided three incredibly detailed reports a few years ago: one on the reform of regulatory architecture, one on reform of the audit industry and one on reform of the UK corporate governance regime. He did that along with a whole team of accountants and industry experts. The points made in those reports are as valid today as they were then, and they are non-partisan. I hope the Minister will take time to read those reports when he is bored over the weekend, and will take some pointers from them that he can take forward in Government policy.”
House of Commons14 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Centre of Mental Health estimates that mental health conditions make up 28% of all referrals, but services receive only 13% of NHS funding. The Health Foundation found that the lack of funding meant that just four in 10 people seeking help would be able to receive it. The sad fact is that it makes no economic sense not to increase investment in the NHS and funding of NHS mental health services. As the Mental Health Foundation states: “Poor mental health costs the UK a staggering £118 billion per year, but much of this is preventable.” I welcome wholeheartedly the motion of my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) and I will support it. The Government must recognise this crisis, properly fund our NHS mental health services, and properly recruit those staff and pay them the wages that they deserve.”
House of Commons7 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Salford City Council estimated in 2021 that there would be between 36,537 and 40,902 additional diagnoses of anxiety and depression in Salford alone, equating to a point prevalence of between 14% and 15.8%. That was before the cost of living crisis hit. For those who reach crisis point, the outlook is equally frightening. An overstretched, underfunded ambulance service means that, often, the police are diverted to emergency mental health calls. That is why there was huge concern expressed recently in response to plans by the Metropolitan police to stop attending emergency mental health incidents. More broadly, in addition to the chronic understaffing of mental health services, funding remains a huge issue.”
House of Commons7 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have heard from constituents suffering with severe depression, waiting months for therapy and simply being told to ring 999 if it gets serious. I have heard traumatic cases of teenagers battling serious mental health conditions who needed urgent help, with no bed available for them for hundreds of miles unless they chose to go on an adult ward, which I am sure for most children and young people would be an extremely frightening experience. I also hear the stories of our hard-working NHS mental health staff, who are overworked, overstretched, underpaid and at breaking point. So there is not a mere crisis in mental health; the service has effectively collapsed. Sadly, I fear for what is to come if the Government do not urgently act today.”
House of Commons7 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In Greater Manchester, the number of children on waiting lists under the NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board is 23,510. The number of adults on waiting lists is 89,250, and the number of patients whose treatment was closed without receiving an appointment at all was 31,405. Those statistics represent people facing crisis, who desperately need help. Like other Members of this House, I have heard many stories from constituents, including those waiting over a year for assessment and treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism or potential learning disabilities. Many have been forced, through desperation, to take out personal loans to pay for private assessments. Then, they have tried to privately fund their own treatment and medication.”
House of Commons7 June 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have watched as the local, community-driven newspaper sector has collapsed over the past 10 years. In my constituency, we no longer have a dedicated Salford newspaper, and when publicly funded news providers such as the BBC also start to curtail their local offering, there is a risk of there being no democratic scrutiny or local news coverage at all. So the Government must recognise that, although the Bill is a welcome step forward, they must urgently turn the tide and act upon the local journalism sustainability recommendations made this year by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. If they do not do so, we risk continuing centralisation of news coverage and erosion of democratic scrutiny, where only the most sensational—”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Cuts to local news provision matter because local journalism is vital to democracy by enabling people to hold local government and public services to account at a time when national news outlets primarily focus their attention on the latest Westminster scandal. Local journalism matters because it helps to build strong, happy communities by allowing local people to hear about the things that matter in their area and by giving them a voice to raise things about which they are unhappy. Local journalism matters because it supports local economic activity by celebrating local businesses and giving young journalists a chance to cut their teeth and gain the skills they need for a career in broadcasting. Sadly, we know what happens when local news services are eroded.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Finally, as we have heard, there is a concern that, although the DMU is able to write tailored conduct requirements for firms with significant market status, not consulting a wider stakeholder base risks leaving it open to regulatory capture. Like the hon. Member for Warrington South, I would be grateful if the Minister considered adding provisions to the Bill to require the DMU to consult third parties to avoid such risks. The Bill will go some way towards rectifying a murky quagmire, but there is much more beyond the scope of this Bill that needs to be addressed. Members will no doubt be aware that BBC members of the National Union of Journalists will walk out on strike on 7 and 8 June over plans to cut local radio provision.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Gentleman gently suggested it, but I am strongly suggesting that clause 29 is not satisfactorily drafted. It allows for a firm with significant market status to continue conduct that contravenes a conduct requirement if it can prove the conduct has an overriding public benefit, but that overriding public benefit is not defined in the Bill. This presents a glaring loophole that could be significantly abused. I hope this is just an oversight on the Minister’s part, and that the clause is not deliberately drafted in that way, but will he clarify this by adding a clear list of acceptable grounds for exemption?”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That means that, even if an SMS firm has no intention of complying with a conduct requirement to negotiate with a news publisher, it could take years from the issuing of such a conduct requirement for the final offer process to be initiated and completed. What will the Government do to expedite this process? Secondly, as I have already mentioned, in other jurisdictions, platforms have restricted or threatened to restrict national news content to avoid payments. What assurances can the Minister give today that the fair dealing objective and the conduct requirement that allows the Digital Markets Unit to prevent a service from being withdrawn in a discriminatory way, could be used to prevent a platform from withdrawing or reducing the volume of UK news sources to reduce the value of payments to UK publishers? Thirdly, the hon.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The government should not give in to similar threats in the UK.” I stress that the Government must not bow to pressure to water down these provisions—in fact, quite the opposite. There are a number of areas where they could strengthen the Bill or provide much-needed clarity. The hon. Member for Warrington South (Andy Carter) highlighted a few areas where we are on the same page, so there is clearly cross-party support. First, there appears to be a protracted process to reach the final offer mechanism in the Bill that allows the Digital Markets Unit to select bids from a strategic market status firm and a publisher for the value of a news contract.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They have been called for by the NUJ, including in its news recovery plan. I also welcome the Bill’s efforts to provide publishers with data that allows for a better understanding of how content performs on platforms. I stress that these provisions must be implemented without any further delay or weakening of conditions, but I fear that the Government will already be under pressure. Indeed, Google and Meta have attempted to ward off similar negotiations in Australia and Canada by restricting or threatening to restrict access to trusted domestic news. The News Media Association has said: “Denying citizens access to reliable information to avoid payment serves only to emphasise the primacy that these firms place on profits rather than citizens’ interests.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“And in all these ways, argue publishers, the increasing grip of certain platforms over news distribution channels is threatening the future of high-quality news.” Without adequate regulation of news provision beyond the regulated news titles or compensation for publishers whose content is used, we risk a wild west of news provision that is chopped, coiffured or skewed without a publisher’s consent and outside the scope of normal news regulation. That should worry us all, because journalism is critical to upholding democracy, to holding local and national politicians like myself to account, and to holding Government and local government to account. None the less, the Bill’s provisions that will provide a mechanism for payments to publishers from tech giants are welcome.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to limit my comments on the Bill to how it affects journalism. The National Union of Journalists has long called for the enforcement of levies on tech giants that unfairly consume editorial content without contributing to its production. That point was highlighted in the Cairncross review: “Publishers frequently complain that the relationship is excessively weighted in favour of the online platforms. In most cases, the latter do not directly remunerate news publishers for placing their content on their platforms, although there are some exceptions.” The review went on to state: “Platforms are not subject to the same press rules of accuracy and fairness as news publishers are.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am coming to the end of my comments—I do apologise. Where only the most sensational news stories that drive the most clicks make it to our computer screens.”
House of Commons17 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q12. Over 3.6 million women born in the 1950s had their pension age increased without their knowledge. Many, like my constituent, unknowingly gave up work at 60, only to realise they had no income, they could not pay their bills and some have even lost their homes. My constituent asks the Prime Minster: will he commit to the fair and fast payment of any compensation that is recommended by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to 1950s women for the injustice they have suffered due to maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions?”
House of Commons3 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“4. What assessment his Department has made of the impact of funding allocations for adult social care on charitable and not-for-profit providers.”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Frontline charities, such as United Response and Age UK, have responded that the Government’s plan falls far short of what is needed, including holding back the promised £250 million in social care workforce funding. Can the Minister promise that will be revisited with urgency, given that one in five over-80s have some unmet care needs and we are facing the highest social care vacancy rates on record?”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If we are serious about tackling this ecological disaster, we need to support the Opposition’s motion today, but ultimately, we need to have a serious discussion about bringing our water industry into public ownership for the public good.”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Beyond that, I urge all colleagues to examine the bigger picture as to why we are in the situation we are in today, and how we can ensure long-term sustainability of the water sector. Privatisation has meant that water bills have increased by 40% in real terms. We have seen £72 billion paid out in dividends to shareholders since privatisation, almost half as much as the money the sector has spent on upgrading and maintaining water and sewerage systems. The galling fact is that the private sector paid very little for the companies when it took them on in 1989, and the truth is that privatisation of our water industry was wrong—it has been a complete failure for the British public.”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is left to individuals and organisations to try to enforce those regulations, but even when they do, they are met with hurdles. Indeed, United Utilities sought a declaration that would effectively bar people from bringing private claims against water companies that dump sewage into rivers and seas, and it won its case in the Court of Appeal most recently. That has meant that any water company can effectively dump sewage into waterways in England and Wales without fear of being sued in the civil courts by landowners, angling clubs, swimming clubs, wildlife groups, residents, or any other group with an interest in the land. As such, action is needed, and the plan described by my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon) is sensible and effective. I hope the whole House will support his motion today.”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“According to the Rivers Trust, in Salford alone, our waterways have been littered with thousands of hours-worth of sewage discharges in 2022, and it will take more than the Government’s fluffy and toothless targets to fix the problem. The water industry has been regulated ever since it was privatised in 1989, and fining many water companies millions of pounds has demonstrably not affected their behaviour. Certain water companies have actually tried to claim in court that they are not public authorities and should not have to publish data on sewage, and years of chronic underfunding of the Environment Agency and inaction by the regulator, Ofwat, have meant that there has been an inability to enforce even the minimal regulation that is available to us in this country.”
House of Commons25 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister paints a rosy picture, but the disadvantage gap continues to be wider than it was in 2019 and the Government have limited the uptake of education recovery programmes, such as the national tutoring programme, and failed to ensure that tutoring was always directed towards the most disadvantaged pupils. Worse still, they have provided less than a third of the funding that their own education recovery commissioner recommended. Will the Minister commit today to increasing funding to meet these urgent needs?”
House of Commons17 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was concerned to hear from the British Medical Association that if the EU were to conclude that data protection legislation in the UK was inadequate, that would present a significant problem for organisations conducting medical research in the UK. Given that so many amazing medical researchers across the UK currently work in collaboration with EU counterparts, can the Minister assure the House that the Bill will not represent an inadequacy in comparison with EU legislation as it stands?”
House of Commons17 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“AlgorithmWatch explains that automated decision making is “never neutral.” Outputs are determined by the quality of the data that is put into the system, whether that data is fair or biased. Machine learning will propagate and enhance those differences, and unfortunately it already has. Is my hon. Friend concerned that the Bill removes important GDPR safeguards that protect the public from algorithmic bias and discrimination and, worse, provides Henry VIII powers that will allow the Secretary of State to make sweeping regulations on whether meaningful human intervention is required at all in these systems?”
House of Commons17 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last year knife crime in Salford fell, thanks to the extensive work with young people by the Salford community safety partnership and Greater Manchester police operations to remove weapons from circulation. Sadly, since January this year there has been a spate of serious knife crime incidents that have destroyed lives and distressed the community. We need urgent Government support to implement a wider proactive reduction strategy. Will the Minister commit to ringfencing dedicated funding today for knife crime reduction initiatives and for lifesaving bleed kit roll-outs across Salford?”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last year we saw £4.1 million in bonus payouts despite the worst performance figures for all rail operators. Today we see contract extensions despite the Office of Rail Regulation showing that 17% of trains had been cancelled since December. Does the Minister think that rewarding failure on this scale is justifiable to the UK taxpayer or, indeed, to passengers?”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Instead, we got a Budget that entrenches poverty and restricts our country’s potential. Off the back of the Budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility projected that living standards are expected to fall by 6% over the next two fiscal years. That is disgraceful. The only answer is a general election because we do not have a fiscally or socially responsible Government in office.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It should be have been bold, ambitious and dedicated to improving lives. It should have set out a clear industrial strategy, with an investment plan alongside it. It should have increased the living wage to £15 an hour, and seen a major improvement in benefits for the poorest and a pay deal for all public sector workers. It should have included a genuine tax on oil and gas companies, and the introduction of a wealth tax on the assets and profits of the super-rich, which could have easily funded a massive injection into our public services. Indeed, that is not a radical idea. Patriotic Millionaires and Tax Justice UK provided a wealth tax plan for the Government prior to the Budget, which would have raised over £50 billion a year for our public services.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There was no extension of support for energy bills for businesses and no support for manufacturing, which is predicted to contract by 3.3% this year. There was no mention of the urgent support needed by our the steel industry, and nothing for SMEs. We heard about the full expensing scheme for larger businesses, which might have been meaningful if it sat alongside an actual industrial strategy. But in the absence of one, it is just another tax break for large companies. On the vision for the future, which the Minister gave a nod to earlier, there was certainly a mention of AI, quantum computing and ARIA. All that is good, but the funding does not match the rhetoric. The reality is that, out of the 38 leading OECD nations, we are 27th in terms of our investment in research and development. This Budget should have been a game changer.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government announced that energy bills would be kept at the same rate for just three months, but that is still a real-terms increase of 19%. There was no mention of making the windfall tax more robust, to provide much needed support, and there was no promise that bills would come down in line with falling wholesale prices. All the while, big oil and gas giants are still raking in billions of pounds in super-profits. The Chancellor ignored collapsing public services, too. Unprotected departments face 10% cuts to real day-to-day spending per capita by 2027-28. On industrial strategy, to be fair to the Chancellor, he did utter the words “industrial strategy”, but they were a passing reference and that is where it ended.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Any responsible Government should have done two things at last week’s Budget. First, they should have insulated people from the cost of living crisis and tackled poverty pay in the process. Secondly, they should have invested in a comprehensive industrial strategy to reverse the decline in living standards. Neither happened. On a day when so many of Britain’s key workers were forced to strike over poverty pay, they were offered nothing. Instead of setting out how his Government would tackle widespread in-work poverty, or how the 7.1 million people on NHS waiting lists, many of whom want to go back to work, could receive the treatment that they need to do so, the Chancellor threatened more vigorous benefit sanctions. The families struggling to afford energy bills were offered crumbs.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Today, the Resolution Foundation reported that workers in the UK are £11,000 worse off per year, after 15 years of almost completely unprecedented wage stagnation. It said: “Nobody who is alive and working in the British economy today has ever seen anything like this… This is definitely not what normal looks like. This is what failure looks like”. Far from being a global phenomenon, as the Government would have us believe, the UK is lagging behind comparable economies such as Germany. In 2008, the gap was more than £500 a year; now, it is more like £4,000. The UK is the only country in the G7 where pay is lower today than it was in 2008. It is the only economy in the G7 that is smaller now than pre-pandemic, and it has the lowest growth forecast for 2023 of any G7 nation.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The BBC’s decision to take Gary Lineker off the air for his criticism of the Government’s immoral, inhumane and unworkable Illegal Migration Bill justifiably angered both the public and the professional staff working for the corporation, many of whom are in my constituency. Sadly, confidence in BBC management was already at a real low following revelations about the circumstances of Richard Sharp’s appointment as chairman. This week, members of the National Union of Journalists across the BBC in England will be taking strike action in defence of our local radio services. Does the Minister agree that the issues with the BBC are much more fundamental than just how presenters use social media? Will she join me in calling on Richard Sharp to resign so that trust in BBC impartiality can be restored?”
House of Commons14 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State says that her ambition is to send the message around the world that the UK is a leader in science and technology, and I share that ambition, but, sadly, the Sir Paul Nurse review of research and development—published today—says that funding provided by the Government is limited, and below that of other competitive nations. In fact, the UK is 27th out of 36 OECD nations when it comes to Government funding of R&D. If the Secretary of State is serious about this ambition, as I truly hope she is—and it would be helpful if she listened to what I am saying—will she commit today to assuring the House that, by next year, the UK will be No. 1 among all the OECD nations in respect of Government funding of R&D?”
House of Commons7 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On stop and search, which colleagues have already mentioned, of course the police must have the ability, sometimes, to stop and search when people are reasonably suspected of various crimes. However, the danger of abuse lies in the threshold of “reasonable suspicion” being low or, worse, as in the case of this Bill, non-existent.”
House of Commons7 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, it makes it an offence to hinder or obstruct those who are assisting emergency workers responding to emergency circumstances. The Lords amendment provides a much more sensible definition of serious disruption. It states that serious disruption “means causing significant harm to persons, organisations or the life of the community, in particular, where…it may result in significant delay to the delivery of a time-sensitive product…or…it may result in a prolonged disruption of access to any essential goods or any essential services”. That complements “significant delay” in the delivery of goods and “prolonged disruption” of access to services, as set out in the Public Order Act 1986, as well as measures in the Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act.”
House of Commons7 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to set this in context, as the Lords have attempted to do. The comparison in English common law is the definition of civil nuisance, which involves “substantial interference”. That is a very high bar, which has been defined by decades of case law on the matter. It is a world away from the low threshold that the Government propose in this measure. I should make it clear that on the issue of blocking emergency vehicles—the Minister might try to cite that as a reason for the Government’s vague and dangerous amendment—of course that should be an offence, but it already is. The Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006 contains two offences. First, the Act makes it an offence to obstruct or hinder certain emergency workers who are responding to emergency circumstances.”
House of Commons7 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗