Ms Nusrat Ghani
MP for Sussex Weald · Conservative · United Kingdom
“Before we come to the urgent question, I must say how disappointing it is that the Government were not forthcoming with a proactive ministerial statement on this matter. The disruption to aviation and the impact on many constituents has been considerable.”
“The point of order and its content are not a matter for the Chair. I have not been notified of any Minister coming forward at this point, but I have only just come into the Chair. If the hon.”
“(3) Regulations under section 14Z45B must provide that, where an out-of-hospital service is to be provided to a patient, the integrated care board must— (a) offer the patient a choice of at least two providers capable of providing the service, which may include NHS bodies and independent sector providers approved to provide that service u…”
“(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the relevant requirements are— (a) that the special educational provision set out in section F of an EHC plan meets the needs identified by an EHC needs assessment; (b) that ICBs can be required to provide such special educational provision; (c) that ICBs must provide such special educational provis…”
“(3) The Charter must— (a) set out the fundamental principles and responsibilities for assessing whether a data sharing partnership is in the interest of the public and the NHS; (b) include the primary goal of protecting people’s privacy and their data from exploitation, while promoting trust in data systems and the handling of health data…”
“(2) Arrangements under subsection (1) must, so far as reasonably practicable, provide for— (a) general practitioners, dentists, pharmacists and other relevant primary care professionals to work together as part of integrated local primary care teams; (b) the sharing of relevant patient information between those professionals through secur…”
The complete record
Every one of 4,837 lines we hold for Ms Nusrat Ghani, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 97.
“We are under huge time pressure—there is another statement to come, and then two items of protected business—so not everybody will get in. Please keep questions short—and keep answers just as short, Secretary of State.”
“We now come to the Select Committee statement on behalf of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee. Florence Eshalomi will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of her statement, I will call Members to ask questions on the subject of the statement. These should be brief questions, not full speeches. I emphasise that questions should be directed to the Select Committee Chair, not the relevant Government Minister. Front Benchers may take part in questioning.”
“Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Monday 23 February , and to be printed (Bill 384 ) with explanatory notes (Bill 384-EN ).”
“57) Secretary Steve Reed, supported by the Prime Minister, Darren Jones, Secretary Liz Kendall, Secretary Lisa Nandy, Dan Jarvis, Samantha Dixon, Chris Ward and Josh Simons, presented a Bill to make provision extending the right to vote to 16 and 17 year olds; to make provision about the registration of voters; to make provision about the administration and conduct of elections, referendums and recall petitions; to make provision about election agents’ addresses; to make provision about political expenditure and political donations; to make provision about information to be included in electronic campaigning material; to make provision about offences and civil sanctions in connection with elections, referendums and recall petitions and with donations and expenditure for political purposes; to make provision about the disclosure of information by the Electoral Commission; to make provision about the disqualification of offenders for holding elective offices, and their sentencing, where offences are aggravated by hostility towards persons involved in elections, referendums or recall petitions or holders of such offices; and for connected purposes.”
“I thank the hon. Member for notice of his point of order. It is important that Members receive timely answers from the Government to such correspondence. No doubt those on the Treasury Bench are listening. It is not a matter for the Chair, but I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench will have noticed not only the hon. Member’s concerns but those of other Members about slow correspondence, and no doubt they will pass on his remarks. He may also wish to consult the Table Office about other steps that he can take if he so chooses. Bill Presented Representation of the People Bill Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No.”
“Order. The hon. Member possibly remembers and knows that when we refer to other Members of the House, we let them know in advance. Has she had time to do that?”
“I wish all colleagues a peaceful and productive recess in their constituencies and, I hope, some time with their families as well. I look forward to spending time with my nephews, Ali and Aadam, who are superfans of Bad Bunny—they make me listen to his music non-stop, and they are looking forward to teaching me the dance moves next. I am not sure whether that is good or bad. Question put and agreed to.”
“Order. The Minister is making an intervention on Mr Wilkinson, not continuing the debate. Please make the intervention, so the hon. Member can respond.”
“With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: That the Referendums Relating to Council Tax Increases (Principles) (England) Report 2026-27 (HC 1605), which was laid before this House on 9 February, be approved.”
“Before I call the shadow Minister, I will announce the result of today’s deferred Division on the draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) (Extension to Maritime Activities) Order 2026. The Ayes were 362 and the Noes were 107, so the Ayes have it. [The Division list is published at the end of today’s debates.]”
“Order. Before the right hon. Member responds, let me say that we have a very healthy number of Members wishing to contribute, so can we make sure that interventions are short? I assume that you will be coming to your conclusion shortly, Dame Emily Thornberry.”
“Order. Before I call the Opposition spokesperson and other Members, I note that the Hashem Abedi case, to which passing reference was made, is sub judice. Members should avoid reference to the specifics of such cases.”
“I thank the hon. Member for giving notice of that point of order. I have not received any notice that any Minister intends to make a statement on this matter. However, Ministers on the Front Bench will have heard the hon. Member’s point of order and will no doubt pass it on.”
“Order. Before the Secretary of State responds, let me say that there are many colleagues in the Chamber and I can understand how passionate this debate is, but let us try to keep the noise down when colleagues are contributing.”
“Order. As so many Members wish to contribute, Back Benchers will be on a speaking limit, which will start at five and a half minutes. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.”
“Order. The hon. Gentleman should please be seated, as I am on my feet. We do not accuse other Members of misleading the House—inadvertently perhaps, but not misleading. Perhaps he can correct the record by starting his question again, and keep it short.”
“Order. I want to make sure that protocol has been followed. First, we obviously do not mention Members by their names, not that the hon. Member has done that. She has, however, referred to a few Members by their constituencies, so can I have her assurance that she let them know that she would be referencing them in the Chamber during this debate?”
“We now come to the Select Committee statement on behalf of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee. Bill Esterson will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of his statement, I will call Members to ask questions on the subject of the statement. These should be brief questions, not full speeches. I emphasise that questions should be directed to the Chair of the Select Committee, not the relevant Minister. Front Benchers may take part in the questioning.”
“Order. I have confidence that the Secretary of State is across his brief and does not need to be warmed up before a question, so get straight to the question so that we get on to the next Member.”
“The Deputy Speaker who was in the Chair before me read out the statement, and I will do so again for clarity. Having given careful consideration to Lords amendments 2 and 3, Mr Speaker is satisfied that they would impose a charge on the public revenue that has not yet been authorised by this House. In accordance with paragraph (3) of Standing Order No. 78, the amendments will therefore be deemed to be disagreed to and are not subject to debate. We cannot keep having the same discussion again and again. This is a very substantial debate and many people hope to speak, so let us proceed as fast as we can.”
“Before I call the shadow Foreign Secretary, for the benefit of the House, and to provide a fuller response to the point of order raised by the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), it is Lords amendments 2 and 3, which relate to the referendum, that will be disagreed to under Standing Order No. 78(3). The expenditure necessary for a referendum has not been authorised by this House. Lords amendments 5 and 6 are within the scope of the debate. Although amendment 6 engages the financial privilege of this House, it does not in itself involve any expenditure. I hope that helps colleagues.”
“The advice I am getting from the Clerk is that that is incorrect because the amendments were disagreed to in the Lords, so we must continue with the debate in hand, as on the Order Paper.”
“I thank— [ Interruption. ] Order. I can make a decision; I do not need any help. That was not exactly a point of order, Minister. It was much more of an intervention, which may have been taken by the Member who was about to rise to her feet. However, the Minister has got his point on the record. We need to move at a pace; otherwise, we will not get speakers in.”
“Order. Mr Hoare, I am worried that the longer you speak, the longer you will disappoint other colleagues who are hoping to contribute later in the debate, and I would not want to ruin your reputation on that front. This feels like a continuation of the debate. The Minister may or may not wish to respond to that point during his closing speech, but my job is to make sure that as many Members as possible who have sat through this debate get to put their voice on the record. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.”
“Dr Luke Evans, you need to stop using points of order to continue debates. No doubt Mr Hayes is going to get right to the point and then conclude very quickly.”
“Order. There appear to be many side conversations taking place. If Members wish to leave the Chamber, they can do so. Otherwise, we should focus on what the Minister is saying.”
“That is not a point of order. Can we prevent the debate from continuing in points of order? If colleagues wish to intervene, they can try to do so, and it is up to the Minister whether he wishes to respond to those interventions. We can keep going until 7.18 pm when the time will cut off.”
“As the House was informed earlier, Mr Speaker is satisfied that Lords amendments 2 and 3 would impose a charge on public revenue that has not been authorised by a money resolution in this House. In accordance with paragraph (3) of Standing Order No. 78, Lords amendments 2 and 3 are therefore deemed to be disagreed to. After Clause 5 Cost of the Treaty Motion made, and Question put, That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 5. —(Stephen Doughty.)”
“Fantastic; that is now on the record. I shall just remind the Minister that he is also more than welcome to come to my constituency of Sussex Weald to deal with any 5G connectivity questions. Question put and agreed to .”
“I thank the hon. Lady for advance notice of that point of order. As she will know, the Chair is not responsible for the content of Ministers’ answers—if only we were—but she has most definitely put her point on the record, and the Minister might wish to respond now.”
“The hon. Member for Stevenage (Kevin Bonavia) mentioned that it is his mother’s birthday. I have been given an update: she is called Yvonne Bonavia. Happy birthday, Yvonne.”
“I thank the hon. Member for raising her point of order. Responses to questions are, of course, a matter for the Government rather than the Chair, but paragraph 22.19 of “Erskine May” states: “Questions for written answer are not in order which renew or repeat in substance questions already answered or to which an answer has been refused in that session of Parliament.” If the Government have refused to answer questions on a specific matter, further questions would therefore not be in order. However, that may not be the case in this instance. I suggest that she seeks further advice from the Table Office on what other routes are open to her to pursue her concerns. [ Interruption. ] The Government Whips are acknowledging that this is something, no doubt, that they will continue in their conversations as well.”
“57) Helen Morgan presented a Bill to place a duty on the Secretary of State to ensure that patients spend no longer than 12 hours between arriving at the accident and emergency department of a hospital and being admitted to hospital, transferred for care elsewhere or discharged; to require the Secretary of State to publish proposals for measures to eliminate the provision of accident and emergency care services in corridors and other spaces not intended for the provision of such services; and for connected purposes. Bill read the F irst time; to be read a Second time on Friday 23 January, and to be printed (Bill 366).”
“I thank the hon. Member for his point of order, which those on the Front Bench will no doubt have heard. The amendments will be available for Members in the usual way after the deadline for tabling has passed—I think he accepts that that has not yet passed. No doubt he has put his point on the record. Discussions between those on the Government and Opposition Front Benches are not a matter for the Chair. Bill Presented Hospitals (Accident and Emergency) Bill Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No.”
“Order. Sixteen Members wish to speak. I do not want to impose a time limit, but if everyone speaks for about eight minutes and monitors their speaking time, everyone will have an equal time in which to speak. Let us try to be mindful.”
“Order. We have to get through this business quite quickly as we have the Finance (No. 2) Bill later, so I urge the Minister to make his responses as brief as possible. We are focused on calling Members from incredibly close to where the storm was, so if it was nowhere near you, please do not bob.”
“Order. Before the Foreign Secretary responds, I remind Members that we have six hours of protected business on the Finance (No. 2) Bill, so this has to move much faster—we need shorter questions. This statement will finish in about 40 minutes.”
“I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving notice that he intended to draw attention to this matter. As he knows, that is not a point of order. He is an experienced Member who serves on the Panel of Chairs, and he does not need any guidance from the Chair on how to take this matter further—no doubt he will pursue it. Those on the Treasury Bench will have heard his request for a statement or response from the appropriate Minister.”
“I am grateful to the right hon. Member for giving notice of his point of order. I take it that he has informed the hon. Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood) that he intended to raise the matter in the House.”
“The right hon. Member is nodding accordingly. As he knows, the Chair is not responsible for the accuracy of ministerial answers—if only we were—but I am sure the Table Office will be able to advise him on how he might pursue the matter further. Once again, I have no doubt that those on the Treasury Bench will have made a note and will pass on that information directly to the Minister involved.”
“(2) The statement made under subsection (1) must include details of the impact on— (a) the hospitality sector, (b) pubs, (c) UK wine, spirit and beer producers, (d) the employment rate, and (e) the public finances.” This new clause would require the Chancellor to make a statement about the effects of the increase in alcohol duty .”
“(4) In this section, ‘the hospitality sector’ means persons or businesses operating in the provision of food, drink, accommodation, or related services.” This new clause would require the Chancellor of the Exchequer to assess and report on the cumulative impact on the hospitality sector of alcohol duty measures in the Act alongside wider fiscal changes, including employer National Insurance contributions and business rates. New clause 26— Statements on increasing alcohol duty — “(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer must, within six months of this Act being passed, make a statement to the House of Commons on the effects of the increase to alcohol duty made under section 86 of this Act.”
“(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), changes to taxation and business costs include, but are not limited to— (a) changes to employer National Insurance contribution rates or thresholds, (b) changes to business rates, including reliefs and revaluations, and (c) any other fiscal measures which materially affect operating costs for hospitality businesses. (3) A report under subsection (1) must include an assessment of the impact of the matters listed in that subsection on— (a) levels of employment across the United Kingdom within the hospitality sector, (b) the number of hospitality businesses ceasing to trade, (c) the number of new hospitality businesses established, and (d) the financial sustainability of hospitality businesses.”
“(3) In this section, ‘the hospitality sector’ means persons or businesses operating in the provision of food, drink, accommodation, or related services.” This new clause would require the Chancellor of the Exchequer to review and report on the impact of the alcohol duty measures in Clause 86 on the hospitality sector, including effects on employment and business viability. New clause 9— Review of cumulative impact on the hospitality sector — “(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer must, within six months of the passing of this Act, lay before the House of Commons a report assessing the cumulative impact on the hospitality sector of— (a) the measures contained in section 86 of this Act, and (b) changes to taxation and business costs affecting that sector introduced outside this Act since 2020.”
“With this it will be convenient to consider the following: New clause 8— Review of impact of section 86 on the hospitality sector — “(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer must, within six months of the passing of this Act, lay before the House of Commons a report assessing the impact of the measures contained in section 86 on the hospitality sector. (2) A report under subsection (1) must include an assessment of the impact of section 86 on— (a) levels of employment across the United Kingdom within the hospitality sector, (b) the number of hospitality businesses ceasing to trade, and (c) the number of new hospitality businesses established.”
“Order. Those on the Liberal Democrat Front Bench know that they have two minutes, not two minutes and 50 seconds or three minutes and 10 seconds.”
“Let me just give colleagues a bit of guidance: if you are going to mention another Member in the Chamber, the protocol is to let them know in advance.”
“We now come to the Select Committee statement on behalf of the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy. Matt Western will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which time no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of the statement, I will call Members to ask questions on the subject of the statement. These should be brief questions, not full speeches. I emphasise that questions should be directed to the Select Committee Chair and not to the relevant Minister. Front Benchers may take part in questioning.”
“I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving notice of his point of order, and for confirming that he has indeed informed the Member he mentioned. He seems to be raising a point of dispute, and the point at issue is not a matter for the Chair, but he has most definitely put his view on the record.”
“I have not been made aware of any such statement, but I have been in the Chair for a little while now. No doubt those on the Treasury Bench have heard that, and will accordingly be acting appropriately.”