Fleur Anderson
MP for Putney · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison, and a delight to be called first. I congratulate the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) on securing this important debate.”
“Hundreds of families have moved out and moved back, and they have just been told that they will all have to move out again in a rota system, all while fighting for remediation.”
“Although I recognise that developers have obligations under the developer remediation contract, my constituents are understandably asking what more can be done by the unit, by Ministers and by the Building Safety Regulator when progress stalls for different reasons.”
“The Bill will place stronger legal duties on landlords and freeholders to remediate unsafe cladding and other fire safety defects within clear timeframes. That is very welcome.”
“In other cases, residents are waiting for final fire risk assessments, EWS1 forms, remediation plans, contractor appointments, updated certifications, smoke extraction systems or the installation of cavity barriers. In all those cases, it is the people in the building who have to chase things up.”
“There are long delays, a lack of clear guidance and a lack of connection between the different bodies involved, as I will demonstrate. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to several developments that are covered by the developer remediation contract with major developers such as Barratt Redrow and Taylor Wimpey.”
The complete record
Every one of 603 lines we hold for Fleur Anderson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 13.
“I will come to his important point on the 300 areas of laws, because it is important to put that in context. However, I reiterate that having a framework within which to negotiate is better for all those areas than not having one, resetting things and trying to do in just three months what has been done and talked about for the past eight years. That is what this Bill would do. I will cover the points made by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim and by others. They were sincerely made, but the Government sincerely disagree. Before I come to the substance of the Bill, it is important that this House should deal in facts, and I am afraid that the opening speech of the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim contained a number of factual inaccuracies that it is important to correct.”
“The common travel area has existed for more than a century, and is integral to the movement of people and goods on the island of Ireland.”
“and learned Gentleman held up the Good Friday agreement and asked where it demands that there be no border infrastructure on the island of Ireland. I know he has his own reservations about that agreement; perhaps that is why the facts have not been understood. That agreement was one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government, and the peace and security it has produced are premised in no small part on the normalisation of security. The absence of a hard border is an overwhelmingly good thing. The hon. and learned Gentleman asked for quotes, and I shall oblige him. The agreement committed to a normalisation of security arrangements and practices, and committed the British Government to “the objective of as early a return as possible to normal security arrangements”.”
“He is right that there are ongoing issues that the Government are working hard with industry and farmers to address, and I am glad that they have been raised by Members today. However, he is simply wrong to say that the vast majority of veterinary medicines are at risk, and engagement with industry suggests no such thing. The hon. and learned Gentleman claimed that the Windsor framework has caused shortages in medicines for diabetes. Again, that is incorrect. Various factors can sometimes give rise to gaps in medicine supplies across the United Kingdom. The overwhelming majority of medicines are in good supply, and we have well-established processes to manage supply issues. His claim that such issues are in any way a result of the Windsor framework, or are specific to Northern Ireland, is wrong. The hon.”
“There was this trilemma, involving the integrity of the UK internal market; avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland; and respecting that our EU partners have a legitimate interest, and being able to co-ordinate trade with it. Those 300 regulations, which are a very small amount of the whole, allow for things like dairy farmers moving milk over the border and back, which I am sure the hon. and learned Gentleman would agree is necessary. They allow for smooth movement of trade. Those remaining regulations enable businesses in Northern Ireland to go about their business. The hon. and learned Gentleman has claimed that the vast majority of veterinary medicines are at risk of being discontinued at the end of next year. That is also incorrect.”
“I am going to make some progress. To the Government’s mind, this commitment to normal security arrangements could not be met, under the common travel area arrangements, with a hard border of the sort that the Bill would institute. The hon. and learned Gentleman indicated that, come what may, he wants his part of the UK enabled to follow the rest out of the EU. I need not remind him that the whole of the UK left the European Union, and that the debate has been settled. We can see that he would prefer that damaging hard border for Northern Ireland.”
“There are absolutely minimal stops along the border. It is not a hard border, but circumstances would be very different under the Bill, which implies an ideological hard Brexit—”
“I hope the right hon. Member understands that I am talking about the difference between a hard border and a soft border. The Windsor framework enables the smooth flow of trade, which is good for businesses on both sides of the border and also safeguards the Union. The Windsor framework does not damage the Union; it actually strengthens it and ensures that it can continue.”
“and learned Gentleman that neither this Bill, nor the similar variations on its proposal that have been advanced over the past nine years, do anything to address the practical issues in a more stable and sustainable manner than the Windsor framework addresses them.”
“Let us be honest: these issues have been discussed, debated, analysed and dissected in this House for nearly a decade now, as other Members have said. They have occupied the political life of the nation for some time, and it is right that they have done so. The concerns of the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim, and those of right hon. and hon. Members from the Democratic Unionist party and the Ulster Unionist party, are real and legitimate, and deserve to be taken seriously. But, although I understand and respect the strength of feeling behind the Bill, I say respectfully to the hon.”
“It would do so automatically by bringing down a hard guillotine on the trading arrangements in just three months, leaving businesses no time to adjust. It would be an economic shock. In my time working on international development campaigns, I saw at first hand at the World Trade Organisation what regulatory certainty and uncertainty can do for the prospects of small businesses, the jobs they create and the economies they contribute to. I can personally attest that it is better for those businesses to work on the basis of agreed trade arrangements than to leave them stranded in the choppy waters of regulatory uncertainty. Secondly, the Bill does nothing to account for Northern Ireland’s unique circumstances.”
“I know that, as a proud Unionist, the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim will appreciate the potential benefits of such an agreement to Northern Ireland and to strengthening the Union, so I confess that I am somewhat baffled that he is promoting legislation that would be so detrimental to the prospect of securing future agreements. It is playing fast and loose with the rule of law, which is very bad for business. The Bill would create conditions in which businesses and citizens can never be certain about which rules will be respected and which will not. It would create uncertainty over the regulatory framework on which businesses in Northern Ireland now rely to trade, including the ability to trade across the island of Ireland without friction.”
“Doing so would weaken our standing abroad and our prospects for beneficial international agreements in the future, which matters, particularly for Northern Ireland. As the House knows, the Government were elected with a mandate to reset our relationship with the EU and tear down trade barriers, including by negotiating a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement. Hon. Members have raised concerns about the operation of the Windsor framework, but there is significant potential for practical issues to be improved or addressed through the negotiation of such an agreement. That is in the best interests of Northern Ireland, and it is in the interests of the United Kingdom as a whole, but a nation that turns its back on prior commitments cannot hope to persuade others to enter new and beneficial arrangements.”
“and learned Member for North Antrim has made assertions about international law, but the absolute truth is that the Bill is premised on replacing the agreed measures under the Windsor framework with unilateralism and uncertainty. In the circumstances, that would constitute a breach of the UK’s agreements, which would be unlawful under international law. This Government are committed to the rule of the law and to meeting the UK’s international obligations, and the Bill contains a set of unilateral measures that do no such thing. This is not an abstract matter; it is a matter of consequence. We must be clear that it is never in any nation’s interests to flagrantly disregard international law and treaty obligations.”
“Friend the Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd), the right hon. Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), the hon. Members for North Down (Alex Easton) and for Belfast South and Mid Down, the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Southall (Deirdre Costigan) and the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart), and others who have yet to contribute. I am grateful to Members for raising many issues, which I will take away. I am also grateful for the comments from the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar and others about continuing to speak, and about dialogue. I turn now to the substance of the Bill. I shall set out three reasons why the Government cannot support it today. First, the Bill cannot be said to be compatible with international law. I know that the hon.”
“I will make some progress now, because time is running out in this debate and I want to get to the end. On the consent vote, it is simply wrong to claim that all major decisions in Northern Ireland require cross-community agreement. As the hon. Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna) pointed out, cross-community agreement was not required for Northern Ireland to leave the EU and is not a requirement for constitutional change, in line with the principle of consent in the Good Friday agreement. The reality is that the Good Friday agreement never envisaged a device such as the consent vote, so the arrangements for that vote were determined by this House and the amendments that it made to the Northern Ireland Act. Let me briefly thank right hon. and hon. Members who have contributed to the debate, including my hon.”
“The Government will only support sustainable arrangements for Northern Ireland that work for business, protect the UK’s internal market and uphold our international obligations. The Windsor framework does just that, and the Government are firmly committed to it, just as stridently as we are committed to the UK internal market and to Northern Ireland flourishing within a strengthened Union. Just as important is that we will be honest with the people of Northern Ireland about what is and is not possible, and what the trade-offs are with various options. There will be no more magical thinking; no reopening of the wardrobe into a political Narnia of mythical solutions to the practical issues that we must consider in respect of trade; and no more simplifications that work as soundbites but do not stand up in reality.”
“Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland initiated the progress for the Northern Ireland Assembly to decide on the continued application of articles 5 to 10 of the Windsor framework. That vote is provided for in the Windsor framework and under domestic law, which was strengthened under the terms of “Safeguarding the Union”. It is now a matter for Northern Ireland’s elected representatives to decide on. I am pleased that the elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland are able, as part of the functioning devolved institutions, to exercise the important democratic scrutiny functions included in the Windsor framework. The Bill would fatally undermine the powers that those in the Assembly have over scrutinising regulations that apply in Northern Ireland.”
“I am going to make progress. As I said earlier, the core challenge remains the trilemma: how do we preserve the integrity of the UK’s internal market, avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, and respect the legitimate interests of our EU partners in protecting their single market, just as we seek to protect ours? The Windsor framework provides an answer to a very difficult question. I say simply that, across several elections, the vast majority of right hon. and hon. Members elected to this place have been elected on a platform of avoiding a hard border. For good reason, then, we need to support the Windsor framework. Thirdly, the Bill would serve to prejudice the democratic decision that the Northern Ireland Assembly is making itself. Last month, my right hon.”
“I do not know where in the world mutual enforcement has worked. I understand how it can work in some limited ways, but not in the wholesale way outlined by the right hon. Member. I am afraid it is in the tradition of unreal answers to real and complex challenges to which the Windsor framework remains the only credible solution.”
“It would not be good for businesses in Northern Ireland, and it would not be good for the people of Northern Ireland. For those reasons, the Government will be voting against the Bill today.”
“I thank the hon. Member for mentioning one area in which this process would be disallowed. However, there is a long list of areas on which we are currently working, in which systems are working well, that would be disapplied. We could go back to 1880 and the Acts of Union, when there actually were differences between the island of Ireland and the rest of the UK, and I could say more about those, but I will end my speech by saying this. I believe that if the Bill were passed, far from strengthening our constitutional settlement—although I am sure that the right hon. and learned Member for North Antrim would wish that to be the case—it would weaken the UK’s constitutional foundations and its international standing immeasurably.”
“Happy Lancashire Day to you as well, Mr Speaker. The Secretary of State and I were deeply saddened by the recent passing of former UTV political editor Ken Reid, who was a close follower of Northern Ireland oral questions. Our thoughts are with his family and his many peers across journalism. I recently attended the launch of Invest NI’s business innovation grant, which received £440,000 of UK Government funding. This will complement the Government’s work to target high-growth sectors in Northern Ireland, including the digital and technologies sector, through our industrial strategy.”
“It is fantastic to hear of those close links, which are so important for innovation and business growth, in combination with the university sector. Northern Ireland’s universities are key partners in boosting innovation and growth; for example, through the UK Government’s new deal for Northern Ireland, £11 million of funding is helping Queen’s University Belfast’s centre for secure information technologies to deliver a cyber-artificial intelligence hub—a leading cyber-security research centre. This investment is unlocking a further £4.5 million of investment from the private sector.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point and the connection to Weston-super-Mare. There is a lot of work that we can do to support innovation across the whole country, including through the business innovation grant that I mentioned, which is especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. It offers grants of up to £20,000 to enable those enterprises to come into the market.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for raising the important aspect of business innovation and for mentioning those businesses, which are important to Northern Ireland’s economy. We are working with the Northern Ireland Executive to ensure the best outcome for Short Brothers and its staff in relation to Spirit. The Department for Business and Trade remains in contact with Spirit, Airbus, Boeing and other potential buyers. We want to see an outcome that includes a commitment to develop Short Brothers and its supply chain as part of any acquisition and that provides the best possible opportunity for growth in Northern Ireland. The Department for Business and Trade continues to provide over £13 million of support for Short Brothers’ research and development activity.”
“This Government are working across the whole of the UK to promote those businesses, and the industrial strategy provides an excellent opportunity to have this discussion. The UK Government are working with businesses, trade unions, local and devolved leaders, experts and international partners to develop that international strategy, which will cement this work and growth. Eight growth-driving sectors have been identified, including some that my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) has already identified—advanced manufacturing, clean energy industries, creative industries and so on. The transition to net zero also provides huge opportunities, and we will make the most of them.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for raising that issue. This is an excellent opportunity to raise something that I have not yet looked at. I will go away and study it, because it sounds like a very important aspect of our joint working. We have many international business opportunities to work with our counterparts in the Republic of Ireland, and I will take it up with them as well.”
“I thank the hon. and learned Member for rightly singing the praises of Wrightbus. The transition to net zero presents huge opportunities, as he has identified, for businesses like Wrightbus in Ballymena. It is producing 1,000 low-carbon buses, securing 500 jobs in its factory and creating 1,500 additional jobs across the UK supply chain. This shows that Northern Ireland is leading the way, and we will continue to work on such opportunities through our industrial strategy.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue. I would like to start by paying tribute to Anna Lo, who passed away earlier this month. As the first ethnic minority politician elected to the Assembly, she was a trailblazer, and I extend my sympathies to her family and friends. The Northern Ireland Assembly currently has no Members from ethnic minorities or ethnic minority backgrounds. I have met many community groups that have raised this matter with me. The key to changing it is the membership and selection processes of the political parties in Northern Ireland, and we should think about what we can all do as Members to speak with people from ethnic minority backgrounds and represent them.”
“I recently met Lilian Seenoi Barr, the first mayor in Northern Ireland from an ethnic minority background, who is showing the way for others. I agree that people must see themselves represented, so I join my hon. Friend in urging all parties across Northern Ireland to look at their selection processes and their invitations to meetings, and to make sure that all parties welcome everyone from every background.”
“I am horrified to hear of that online abuse, and I am horrified to hear of any abuse that any politicians receive. I commend Jay for his courage in saying, “Actually, this is not putting me off. I want to stand again.” The hon. Member is quite right to raise this matter, as we would all want to do, and to show support for Jay and others who want to be able to say that they can stand and not receive such abuse. We should call it out whenever we see it.”
“White Ribbon Day this week marks the start of 16 days of activism against violence against women and girls. The scale of this violence in our country is unacceptable, and this Government is treating it as the national emergency that it is. Every woman and girl deserves to feel safe wherever she is. That is why the Labour Government have set out our ambition to halve violence against women and girls within a decade. The Government want to take a joined-up approach across the UK, and I have discussed this issue with the First and Deputy First Ministers and the Deputy Prime Minister. We will continue to work collaboratively with the Executive—”
“I thank my hon. Friend for raising that question. Alongside the alarming femicide statistics, there are other factors that add to the complexity of gender-based violence in Northern Ireland, and it is important to recognise and take action to prevent these factors—paramilitarism is one of them. We need to tackle the grip of paramilitaries to end this abuse.”
“I am delighted to see so many men raising this issue today at Northern Ireland questions. Yesterday, I met with Tahnee McCorry from White Ribbon Northern Ireland, who is working with men in football and Gaelic Athletic Association teams and in prisons. We absolutely all have a role to play to have those difficult conversations and really change our society.”
“I am very supportive of the Executive’s strategic framework to tackle violence against women and girls. I am in constant dialogue with organisations such as White Ribbon NI to learn and share best practice. That is how we are going to achieve this—in partnership with the Executive. The Government are committed to tackling online abuse and violence against women and girls with the Online Safety Act 2023 and further work we will be doing on this matter.”
“I pay tribute to all the Women’s Aid organisations across Northern Ireland, which do absolutely fantastic work. It is about prevention and provision of services. Tackling online abuse and violence against women and girls wherever we see it—by everyone in this House and across the UK—is the only way that we will change this situation.”
“Action by police officers is fundamental, and we are looking at how we can change the justice system, as we are doing across the UK, as our target to halve violence against women and girls is essential. It is, however, about much more than that—it is about a whole-of-society change and tackling misogyny wherever we see it. Every organisation needs to get involved in this. Action by the police is one part of it, but it is about so much more than that.”
“In the Budget, this Government provided a record-breaking devolution settlement of £18.2 billion, with £640 million this year and £1.5 billion next year. It is now up to the Chief Constable to spend those figures.”
“The revised code promotes the fundamental principles to be observed by the police, and helps to preserve the effectiveness of, and public confidence in, the use of police powers to stop and search under the Terrorism Act 2000. I very much hope that hon. Members will support these alterations to the code of practice.”
“The fact that the threat level for Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains “substantial”, following its reduction in March 2024, is testament to the tremendous efforts of the PSNI and security partners. We must ensure that they have the right and appropriate tools in order to continue to do this. I know that hon. Members will join me in welcoming the increased additional security funding that will be provided to the PSNI in the next financial year. This £37.8 million of funding, provided in recognition of the unique security situation in Northern Ireland, ensures that the PSNI is equipped to tackle the threat posed by Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland.”
“Of the six who responded in favour, five suggested other slight amendments to the code, which were duly considered, with a number being accepted. The full details of those suggestions were published in the consultation response document on the NIO webpages in March 2024. I hope that hon. Members will agree that, while these revisions are technical, they are important. They align the code of practice used in Northern Ireland with the code used in the rest of the UK, ensuring that this offender management tool is available across the UK. They give guidance to the PSNI in its use of the stop-and-search powers in the Terrorism Act. This Government are committed to keeping people safe.”
“These differences reflect the devolution of policing and justice functions in Northern Ireland and subsequent differences in approach adopted in different jurisdictions. For example, the code for Great Britain contains an explanation of the basis upon which an offender is to be released on licence, whereas the revised code for Northern Ireland outlines the roles of both the Parole Commission and the Department of Justice in the process. The Government ran a 12-week public consultation on the proposed amendments to the code of practice, which closed in January 2024. Seven responses were received, six of which were in favour of the revisions, with one response commenting that, as a matter of policy, it would not be appropriate for them to comment.”
“In keeping with existing stop-and-search powers, police officers exercising the section 43C power may not compel a person to remove any clothing in public except for an outer coat, a jacket or gloves, and an intimate search may not be authorised or carried out under the new power. Also added to the NI code is an explanation of when the search condition can be added to a licence, specifically to help to manage the risk posed by terrorist offenders on licence who are assessed to be a high or very high risk to the public. Finally, the code as amended contains some language and formatting differences from the code for Great Britain. However, the purpose and key content of the code remains the same.”
“Even when the power is included as a licence condition, in order for it to be used, the constable must be satisfied that it is necessary to do so for purposes connected with protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism. Furthermore, the constable may conduct the search in any place they have access to legally, whether or not that is a place to which the public has access. In revising the code to include the section 43C power, we have set out for police officers the basic principles for its use, and clarity on its scope. This includes guidance on when the power can be used and the powers of seizure associated with the search power. The revised code also clearly sets out limitations on the clothing that a person can be required to remove when the section 43C power is being exercised by officers.”
“The code as amended provides guidance to the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and to officers from police services in England, Wales and Scotland when operating in Northern Ireland, not only on the use of sections 43, 43A and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000, as outlined in the original code of practice, but on the use of section 43C. Section 43C provides a power for a constable to search a terrorist offender who has been released on licence and not recalled, and whose licence includes a search condition. I wish to reassure hon. Members that this power applies only to those who have been convicted and for whom, when released, it was deemed appropriate to have this licence condition included as part of the conditions of their release.”
“They are intended to provide guidance to the Police Service of Northern Ireland on the search powers in the Terrorism Act 2000. The equivalent code of practice for police in England, Wales and Scotland was updated in 2022. The changes to the Northern Ireland code will align with the code of practice for England, Wales and Scotland, but will not mirror it exactly due to jurisdictional differences. The revised code builds on work started by previous Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office. I will outline the main revisions. The primary update to the code is the incorporation of the new stop-and-search power provided for by section 43C of the Terrorism Act 2000.”
“The order puts into practice the revised “Code of practice (Northern Ireland) for the authorisation and exercise of stop and search powers relating to sections 43, 43A, 43C and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000”, hereafter referred to as the code. A copy of the draft revised code was laid before Parliament on 15 October 2024. The purpose of the code is to provide guidance to officers authorising and conducting stop and search under sections 43, 43A, 43C and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000, and protection to persons being searched. I would like to start by assuring hon. Members that the revisions to the code will not change the manner in which searches are conducted in any way. The amendments should be non-contentious and relate mainly to technical matters.”
“In response to recommendations made by Jonathan Hall KC following that review, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, hereafter referred to as the 2022 Act, established three new powers for counter-terrorism policing: a personal search power, a premises search power and a power of urgent arrest. Those powers were established in 2022. The order relates to the new power of personal search, the creation of which was also recommended by the “Fishmongers’ Hall Inquests: Prevention of future deaths” report. That power, which came into force on 28 June 2022, was inserted into the Terrorism Act 2000 in section 43C by the 2022 Act and applies UK-wide.”
“It is important that the PSNI has the tools it needs to allow it to continue to keep people safe. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our former and current police officers and members of the security services, who work so hard and with such courage to keep us safe. Following the terrorist attack at Fishmongers’ Hall in November 2019, the then Home Secretary commissioned the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, to review the multi-agency public protection arrangements, commonly referred to as MAPPA, which are used to supervise terrorist and terrorist-risk offenders on licence in the community.”