Graham Stringer
MP for Blackley and Middleton South · Labour · United Kingdom
“I congratulate the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope) on securing this debate. One of the surprising things, given how many people died during the covid epidemic, as well as the cost of approximately £400 billion and the cost of the inquiry heading northwards to £1 billion, is how little debate there has been in Westmins…”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“But on 11 February 2020, SAGE had before it a report from Imperial College, based on Chinese statistics, showing a very strong relationship between age and mortality among people who caught covid. Basically, children were not at risk and people over 70 were at serious risk.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The information was there and could have been used. The heroine of this episode, mentioned in the report, is Kate Bingham, who ran the vaccine taskforce. Because of her expertise in both science and funding, she was primarily responsible for getting the vaccine out more quickly than anywhere else.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will call Matt Vickers to move the motion. I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. I have had no notice that such permissions have been given.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I strongly agree with the Government’s policy on devolution and better technical and scientific education, but all that will be for nought if we do not do something about the cost of energy. We cannot grow and compete as an economy when we have higher energy costs than our major industrial competitors.”
House of Commons7 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am fully supportive of Stephen Watson, the chief constable of Greater Manchester. It is the first time I can say that about a chief constable since the 1970s.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
2,598 lines on record for Graham Stringer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 3 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.
“At the start of this debate, as a fellow scientist, I wondered what the difference was between mensuration and metrology. When I was an undergraduate, we did not use the word “metrology”—it seems to be a new word. Perhaps my hon. Friend can enlighten the Chamber.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have been following the hon. Member’s arguments closely. It is certainly the case that, with or without wisdom, the House is capable of making poor decisions. I have voted for measures and against them on occasion, and the House has made poor decisions. However, it is much more likely that the House will get it right, rather than a delegated legislation Committee dealing with a statutory instrument where a Minister comes along and reads out a brief that she or he often does not understand, as is revealed under questioning—if, indeed, questioning takes place. The argument for the Bill is really to do with speed and capacity. We do not meet to vote on Thursdays, but we often do on Mondays. There is plenty of time for the House to do this.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not against the Lower Thames crossing, but three quarters of a billion pounds has already been spent on assessing whether it will be any use whatever, and that money would benefit transport in Greater Manchester, and jobs and investment for the whole country, much more than it will the Lower Thames area. [Dr Andrew Murrison in the Chair ] We have suffered, in that we are not getting High Speed 2 at the moment. I think the campaign to get the rail link from Birmingham to Manchester and Manchester airport should continue. It is extraordinary to see the billions of pounds that have been spent on high-speed rail from London to Birmingham, mainly on tunnels.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For all of Transport for Greater Manchester’s successes, it has had to fight the Department for Transport to get extra investment for Metrolink and fight Labour and Conservative Ministers to get money for investment. There is great potential in the north-west. In fact, we would get more out of investment in transport links in the north-west than the south-east, because of what we are, in effect, doing when we invest in London and the south-east. All transport investment creates jobs and growth, but in London and the south-east we are then, in effect, subsidising congestion, because we get so much congestion that we need more investment afterwards. That is not the situation in Greater Manchester and the north-west.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms McVey. In the few minutes available to me, I would like to put transport in the north-west into perspective. I would not like anything I say to be taken as a criticism of the mayor or of Transport for Greater Manchester. The Bee network, which is an excellent scheme, has put Greater Manchester to the situation London has had for the last 45 years, which we see as progress. As the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) has just said, investment in transport is vital for economic growth. However, when we look at the national objectives, and as we have seen forever—since the second world war—more money is going into London and the south-east than the north-west.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For the first time for nearly a quarter of a century, we do not have viable plans that we know will happen, and we may have to carry on fighting Ministers and the Department for Transport for the next stage. Obviously, I would like trams to go to Middleton, as I represent part of it, but I agree that trams going to Stockport and other parts of the conurbation—perhaps Leigh as well—would mean transport and economic development. So I think we have to keep campaigning and making the case that bucks spent on transport in Greater Manchester will get us more than money spent in London and the south-east.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is precisely right: the real case for High Speed 2, as I am afraid it will always be called, was capacity. We are not getting that extra capacity between Birmingham and Manchester without HS2. If that capacity were to happen—it should happen—it would lead to the necessity of extra investment in the rail system east, west and internally within Greater Manchester. It would lead to more investment, so we need to campaign for it. All we have at the moment is an extension to the London underground system, which will benefit London and Birmingham. The hon. Member for Hazel Grove mentioned the Metrolink going to Stockport, and I agree with her.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the context of the north-west, we are all friends on this matter. The hon. Member probably does not know, but a few years ago the Transport Committee did a study into north-west trains and found that train schedules in the north-west—not when the trains actually run—were slower when there was a Liberal Prime Minister. Even more surprisingly, it was not Campbell-Bannerman; it was Gladstone.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, will he look at the formulas that decide where economic growth happens, which are biased against the regions?”
House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sorry, Mr Speaker. I was nearly as shocked when you called me as I was when listening to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Radio 4 talking about economic growth. She said there had not been a new runway built in this country since 1945. Manchester airport would be very surprised to hear that, because its new runway has been operating for nearly 25 years. I was shocked by that but not really surprised, because I think many officials in the Treasury who advise her show a startling ignorance of the English regions, and that leads to a certain prejudice in the formula they use to calculate whether a scheme should go ahead. Can the Minister and the rest of the Treasury team provide coaches to send Treasury officials around the English regions to talk to people who know about growth?”
House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I remind hon. and right hon. Members to bob if they wish to speak. I intend to call the Front-Bench spokespeople at half-past 10 so I will impose a four-minute limit on speeches. That gives very little scope for interventions though it is up to hon. Members whether to take them, but I may have to reduce the time limit.”
House of Commons26 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have gained a considerable amount of time because of disciplined interventions and short speeches. I ask the Minister to ensure that there is a small amount of time at the end for the Member in charge to wind up.”
House of Commons26 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Order. I remind Members that, even if they have put in to speak, they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate. The debate is well subscribed, so I ask hon. Members to stick to about six minutes. I will not impose a time limit now, but that should enable everybody to speak. Finally, Mr Speaker has made it clear that if people are called to speak, they should be here for the wind-ups, as in the Chamber.”
House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is no defined time limit at the moment, but I did suggest that people take about six minutes. I presume that the right hon. Gentleman is bringing his remarks to a conclusion.”
House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I say in the gentlest possible way to my hon. Friend the Minister that losing investment in Merseyside and the north-west is not compensated for by investment in the Oxford-Cambridge corridor, particularly as some years ago we lost Diamond Light Source from Daresbury? I would also like to ask him a question on a deeper issue beyond the normal party political dance: it’s their fault. it’s not, or whatever. When Kate Bingham, the heroine of covid and developing vaccines, finished she made excoriating comments about our civil servants and their ability to understand science and biological sciences. What is the Minister doing to improve that situation, so that distinguished people like Kate Bingham do not say that officials in the civil service treat this huge industry with suspicion and contempt?”
House of Commons3 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Order. If Members wish to make an intervention, they should stand to do so. It is up to the person who is speaking whether to accept an intervention. I was going to say this at the end of Ann Davies’s speech, but I will say it now. This debate is oversubscribed, so I will put a time limit on speeches. Members should make short interventions, because interventions will mean less time for those people who have put in to speak.”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Order. I remind hon. Members that they should bob if they wish to be called. The debate is well subscribed, so I am going to start with a four-minute limit. If there are a lot of interventions, that time will have to be reduced.”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the time limit that I have set, if people took the four minutes, we would finish the Back-Bench speeches at 3.19 pm. One of the problems is that some people have put in to speak but are not standing. That made the calculation difficult, because I assumed that people who had put in to speak would be bobbing, and they have not. At the moment, I will go with the four minutes that we have agreed.”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Order. I will call Sir Bernard Jenkin to move the motion and the Minister to respond. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates. I have been informed that two hon. Members have been given permission by the mover and the Minister to speak in the debate.”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend’s statement stands in sharp contrast to that made on 25 May 2023 by the previous Secretary of State, when he completely forgot to put in his statement, both written and verbal, North Manchester general hospital. I am pleased that North Manchester general hospital is today in the first wave, but I would be grateful if my right hon. Friend could spell out in detail when the work will continue, because in one of the areas of the country with the worst health outcomes, it is not only a hospital scheme; it is an urban regeneration scheme, and some work has started. Will that work be allowed to continue? Can he give me some details, please?”
House of Commons20 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Furthermore, I do not believe that setting up a new quango in conjunction with the Cabinet Office, which has no experience of service delivery, will be the answer to any future epidemic. The report does not answer the questions I would like answered.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am less sanguine about the report than my right hon. Friend. The report, or what is part of a report—it is difficult to assess when we do not know what the rest will say—has been too expensive and has taken too long to produce. From reading it, it does not seem to me to include some of the fundamental questions that I and my constituents would like answered. What was the cost-benefit analysis of the decisions taken during lockdown, for instance? What about lockdown itself? Was that a benefit or a disbenefit? What was the cost of effectively closing down the NHS, apart from for covid patients? Where did the virus come from? Did it come from China, which most of the evidence seems to indicate? Those questions are not being answered.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With Paroxetine—I think that is how to pronounce it—GSK held back information because it did not release the tests that did not show a positive benefit. It also kept back tests that showed that Paroxetine increased the chances of children committing suicide, and it took a lot of investigation to get that—”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is there any Member in the House who thinks that turning the MHRA, in the right hon. Lady’s phrase, from a watchdog to an enabler is a good idea, or even knows what it means and what is being enabled? I certainly do not know what is being enabled, but one of the things we should remember is that the MHRA and the whole of the health industry are swimming in a sea of pharmaceutical sharks. Pharmaceutical companies produce some extraordinarily wonderful products that keep us safe, but they also produce huge profits, and sometimes they get their products on to the markets by telling lies, or certainly by sins of omission. Everybody knows about the thalidomide case, and how long it took to prove it and to get compensation for the victims. Almost at random, I have picked two other cases.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We know that no medicine is 100% safe, and there is no point in pretending they are safe, but vaccines have saved many lives over decades—more than decades; over a century—and it is good for society and for individuals that people understand that, and they will be less trusting if we do not tell them what is going on. As recently as a few minutes ago, I got an email telling me that the UK Health Security Agency is still refusing to release the cost of the bird flu vaccines it has purchased. What possible reason can there be for not saying how much public money has been spent on a good cause? Having vaccines ready for any flu epidemic is a good thing because it saves people’s lives, as we have been discussing. Why should it be kept secret? Could the Minister to respond to that?”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Earlier today in the Chamber, we talked about the Government’s response to the first part of the covid inquiry. At the present time, that inquiry is not getting to part of what went wrong during covid, which was the fact that the NHS did not tell us what was going on, and there was also a restriction on political debate. If we are to get the best policies in any crisis, and in the regular turn of events outside crises, we need transparency so that we know how things can be improved and what we can criticise. The right hon. Lady made the excellent point that keeping things secret encourages people who do not trust vaccines and have odd theories about how societies is controlled not to take the protection from vaccines.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Again, that was a long time ago. It was a different issue with the breast implants, because the MHRA was dealing with a fraudulent product—the products that had been authorised were not the products that were being sold to surgeons to be implanted in women. However, the Committee asked for there to be random and regular testing of the bodies that were responsible for manufacturing those implants. I do not expect the Minister to know at this time, but will she check whether the authorities have done any of those randomised tests on those bodies? That is the history. The right hon. Member for Tatton has basically analysed what is going on now, but I will just talk about what we learned during the covid period. We learned that many of the NHS’s constituent parts—although not the clinicians—were secretive.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Anybody who had the competence—or at least the authority—in any country in the EU could give authorisation, but nobody knew which body had done it, and whether that body was composed of competent people and what evidence they had used to do so. However, when the MHRA found out, it did nothing for four years. That is disgraceful, and there were all sorts of comments that I can give the House. One was from Dr Stephen O’Connor at the Institute of Physics and Engineering, who said that the MHRA was overly bureaucratic relative to other competent bodies, inefficient, and difficult to deal with. As the right hon. Member for Tatton showed, the MHRA does not answer FOI requests, and it does not tell us what is going on. The Lancet said about the breast implants, which I will talk about next, that the MHRA was in paralysis and in need of reform.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will read out some of the comments from the witnesses we heard from about the MHRA, because they are being repeated now. They are very similar to what the right hon. Member for Tatton said about the MHRA’s responses—secretive and slow. For instance, there was evidence that there were problems with metal hips for four years before the MHRA took any action whatsoever. Nearly 14 years later, it still has the same problems. I asked Dr Heneghan from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford who had authorised those metal hips. His answer was extraordinary: “Nobody knows. I don’t know—nobody knows.” It was a different regulatory regime then, because we were part of the European Union.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We cannot as a Government and MPs abdicate our responsibility, because we then come to a crisis, and the electorate say, “Well, what are you doing?” and the answer is, “Not a lot; we have passed that on.” Those water regulators or medical regulators might be, as the right hon. Lady showed, pretty useless. We should be looking at them all the time. I was a member of the Science and Technology Committee in 2012. Partly because of that experience, and partly because there was a lot of press discussion and debate about metal hips that were squeaking and not working very well when they had been implanted and about breast implants that were falling apart, potentially damaging and poisoning the recipients, we had an inquiry that reported in October of that year.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When I had that responsibility, I went to see the European Medicines Agency—this was some time before we left the EU. One of the surprising things I found—or maybe it was not so surprising—was that I was the only Minister who had been anywhere near the place. It was the major European agency that this country got after the Maastricht treaty. It had wide-ranging and important powers, to deal both with the market and with regulation, but nobody bothered with it. If there had been a crisis, however, Ministers and shadow Ministers would have been queuing up to go there. If there is a lesson, particularly in relation to the MHRA, it is that we should look at regulators—be they water, medicine or other regulators—all the time.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a child dies, if there is a fire, or if there is another disaster of some sort, there is a cry from both sides of the House for more regulation— not necessarily better regulation and enforcement, but more regulation—when, in many cases, regulations are already there but inspections and enforcement have not taken place. The other knee-jerk response, which my Government are giving at the moment, is to say, “Regulations are burdensome so we will try to get rid of some of them.” I do not think that either of those responses deals with the issue. We set up regulators—this afternoon we are talking about the MHRA—but, by and large, once they are set up, MPs and Ministers abdicate responsibility and do not consider them until there is a crisis.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Tatton (Esther McVey). I agree with every word she said. It is late in the day for a Thursday, so I will try not to repeat many of the pieces of evidence and arguments that she proposed, but they are all valuable contributions to this debate. I will start by talking about the attitude of Members of Parliament and politicians to regulation in general. A long time ago, I had responsibility in the Cabinet Office for dealing with better regulations. I travelled around the country to look at businesses that complained about regulations and see how those regulations could be made better—that was 18 months of my life that I will never get back. I came to a number of conclusions after that. Politicians have a knee-jerk reaction when it comes to regulation.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am. I have one sentence. I am sorry; I did not realise I had speaking for so long. Lastly, Reboxetine is another example of where the information given out to doctors was inadequate because it did not show the negative tests. I use those two examples basically to show that the MHRA should not be enabling these things. It should be much more vigilant, and it should be asking for powers to demand the right to know all the information that drugs companies have before it says those drugs are as safe as they can be.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When I was leader of Manchester city council, I spent a large percentage of my time trying to right the wrongs of Labour and Conservative Governments in the ’60s and ’70s who had made a similar dash to build many, many houses. I spent my time finding ways to fund the demolition of deck-access housing. As a result, I became convinced that the solution to every problem is not more power to the centre. The people in Chorley know what is best for Chorley, Mr Speaker, just as the people in Manchester know what is best for Manchester. Will my hon. Friend assure me that he will look at the mistakes that were made in the ’60s and ’70s in the dash for building, and ensure that we do not have really bad decisions made from the centre, or the exclusion of local councils?”
House of Commons9 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It looks as though hon. Members do not need reminding that if they wish to catch my eye they should bob, even if they have put in to speak. I call Sir Alec Shelbrooke.”
House of Commons5 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Lady for correcting herself and acknowledging that “you” refers to the Chair. I also remind all hon. Members that interventions should be brief and to the point.”
House of Commons5 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q10. My right hon. Friend has come under intense scrutiny from the press at different times, and she must have found it difficult. A press that is free to scrutinise politicians is vital in a free society and a democracy. Is she as concerned as I am by the Stasi-like interview that was given to Allison Pearson of The Daily Telegraph a week last Sunday? Does she agree that the Essex police force and other police forces would be better trying to deal with shoplifting, burglaries and other crimes, rather than intimidating journalists?”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Deciding to defer or to review is just as much of a decision as one to go ahead or not to go ahead, because it means that nothing is happening. The Typhoon factory at Warton is currently idle—no Typhoons are being produced—which is bad for exports and bad for our defence. Can the Secretary of State tell the House when we will take a decision to procure more Typhoons? There are 25,000 jobs at risk, as well as the country’s defence.”
House of Commons18 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend says that she does not want to undermine our commercial relationship with China. I do. China is carrying out genocide of the Uyghurs. It is an appalling country—or, rather, it has an appalling leadership, to be precise. It is trying to monopolise crucial supply chains around the world in order to oppress people. Surely we should be reducing our relationship and making ourselves independent.”
House of Commons29 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this debate would be much easier if the Committee on Climate Change had produced a year-by-year estimate of the costs of getting to net zero by 2050? The previous Government always promised to do a proper impact assessment on costs, but they never did. I believe that this Government should do that, so we can have an objective and evidence-based debate. Does he agree?”
House of Commons29 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Member is making a case on shifting sand, which seems to boil down to one of people not having had time to consider the issue. First, this reform has been in two Labour manifestos, one in 1997 and one this year, and it had overwhelming support from the electorate. Secondly, the compromise reached between the Labour party and the Conservative party in 1999 was nothing to do with the good work done by many hereditaries; it was to stop logjam, because the House of Lords was threatening to hold up Labour’s programme and throw the Salisbury convention aside.”
House of Commons15 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Universities and academic freedom are vital to the intellectual and economic health of this country. Free speech was mentioned in our manifesto earlier this year, but there was no mention of this particular decision, which was made 21 days after the Secretary of State took office. Sadly, I therefore find it difficult to support this decision, on that basis alone. Can the Minister tell me whether, when she talks about burdensome issues, she means the Chinese Government threatening to withdraw resources from our major universities, because I think that is at the bottom of the pressure that was unduly put on the Secretary of State?”
House of Commons10 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I remind hon. Members to bob if they wish to speak so that I can see who wants to speak. Some people have written in—I have a list here. Please be patient if I get names wrong, because everybody’s face is new. I will try very hard to get it right.”
House of Commons12 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Before I call the hon. Lady to resume her speech, this is probably a good opportunity to remind hon. Members that we are all on a learning curve, and interventions should be short and to the point. We do not have a lot of Members here, so it will not be difficult for you to catch my eye if you want to make a speech yourself.”
House of Commons12 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last week and this week have been the best two weeks for public transport for many decades, righting the wrongs of the privatisation of the rail service and the deregulation of buses. I did not hear an apology from the Conservative spokesperson for laying waste to local government finance over the last 14 years and destroying public bus services by handing them over to be run by profiteers, pirates and other completely unsuitable people—not in all, but in many cases. Does my hon. Friend agree that there should be a massive apology from the Conservatives for the damage they have done to public transport?”
House of Commons9 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Unsurprisingly, I have listened to the hon. Gentleman’s speeches on a number of occasions, and I agree with quite a lot of what he is saying about transparency. Does he agree that the burden of his argument is that we cannot make a Government behave better or govern more effectively by quango? This quango was set up by George Osborne to trap an incoming Labour Government and restrict and slow them down, and it is an odd thing that we see this quango being gilded.”
House of Commons4 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am certainly the old guard from the start of the previous Labour Government. That is relevant because I had a discussion at the time with the then Paymaster General, Geoffrey Robinson, about the cost of PFIs for hospitals. His answer was succinct: “If you want the hospitals, you have to go down the PFI route.” He said that because the Treasury rules were so rigid about finding money for socially needed projects—hospitals in that case—the Government had to work around them, at what would eventually be a huge cost to the taxpayer. There is a warning there about rigid rules and not dealing with reality.”
House of Commons4 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I say, I do not expect the Front-Bench team to criticise the officials they have to work with, but I hope they will take on board the fact that there are real problems and that we need to deliver right across the rail system to create a wholly publicly owned industry as soon as possible.”
House of Commons3 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Owing to the way the franchises are dealt with, some of the better train-operating companies—such as Greater Anglia, which has a reasonable record—will come up first, whereas Avanti has eight years left on its contract. It seems to me that it would be easy for officials to recommend dealing with the best first rather than the worst, which is not in the interests of passengers or the taxpayer. We really need as a Government to get control of that and deal with the worst first, because that is where we are losing money, that is where passengers are suffering, and that is where money is being taken out of the system.”
House of Commons3 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗