Mr Richard Holden
MP for Basildon and Billericay · Conservative · United Kingdom
“Having spoken to Mr Speaker earlier today, it was my understanding that urgent questions requested by my party and by the Liberal Democrats were not accepted because the Government gave assurances that a statement will be made in the House tomorrow.”
“I also agree with the Secretary of State’s observation in her letter to colleagues on 1 September, in which she said that the contributions of the Lords have helped strengthen the legislation before the House today. At its core, this is broadly an administrative Bill.”
“If the Minister would like to speak, he can stand at the Dispatch Box. No, he does not want to do that—fine. We will have him here tomorrow, then, as we were told today that our urgent question would not be accepted because the Minister would be making a statement. We will have to see whether that actually happens.”
“I know that the Secretary of State is incredibly busy selling out taxpayers in her latest meetings with union barons who have her over a barrel; she was apparently too busy to join me and many of the shadow ministerial team at the Farnborough air show.”
“I genuinely find it difficult to believe that the Secretary of State does not herself believe that there is a simple link between Gatwick having a minimum target of more than half of passengers getting to and from the airport by public transport and the soaring drop-off charges.”
“The Government have talked a lot about growth, yet have refused to set tangible targets to deliver it—whether in this aviation Bill, or indeed for passenger growth in the Railways Bill.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Mr Richard Holden, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 12.
“The hon. Lady is making an interesting point. The key point with that carry-over of EU law is that all the regulations had already been debated and had already gone through Parliament. All we were doing was replacing like with like. With this Bill, the Government are introducing huge Henry VIII powers to create brand-new legislation, perhaps around production regulation, but on who knows what else? Who knows what impact it will have, and on which countries? That is the difference. We are removing parliamentary scrutiny, rather than just carrying over old EU laws into current UK law.”
“Smile Dental Centre is in one of the least affluent parts of my community in Basildon. It is looking to expand and provide more NHS dental services, but it has come up against a few issues. Will the Minister, or one of his officials, meet me and Smile Dental Centre to see what we can unblock to deliver more dental health services for local people?”
“The Minister is explaining what the Government are doing, but they are not doing what Members of this House and of the other place want—not just asking people to do stuff but leading. That is what this amendment does: it would allow the UK to really show its leadership on behalf of the British public. This will be a huge public company. Why will the Minister not just commit to that further step today?”
“That raises a broader point. At the moment, councils in parts of the country such as my constituency are being abolished by this Government, so there will be no democratic accountability down the line, and there will be no democratic accountability at council level through planning committees, either. They are removing layer after layer of protection for local communities such as mine, with huge amounts of green-belt land suddenly redesignated as grey-belt land, despite recently being high-grade agricultural land. Can my hon. Friend understand the concerns in communities such as mine about what these proposals are doing? They want to see more housing, but not at the expense of London seeing a housing target—”
“Compared with this time last year, almost 500 more people are on the claimant count in Basildon and Billericay. Almost 100 of those are under 25. How many more will have to be made unemployed before Labour Ministers listen to charities, GPs, supermarkets, manufacturers and care providers? They visited me in my constituency and said that Labour needs to think again about its catastrophic national insurance rise which, before it even hits in April, is already costing the jobs of my constituents.”
“The Minister complains about having to explain the Government’s position, but why can he not just explain to us why the Secretary of State has not fixed this issue yet? It seems that there has been a meeting, but she has not even written a letter in the last three weeks explaining what she wants to happen. That is why I thank you very much indeed, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question again. The Minister has not actually fixed the problem that we are all talking about.”
“Our local Noak Bridge and Billericay councils have already signed up to the beacon lighting for VE Day. Will the Minister encourage all local councils across the country, including district, county and parish councils, as well as community groups to come together and do everything they can to make these celebrations something for their whole community? As I have been listening to other hon. Members, I have also been reflecting on our recent Commonwealth Parliamentary Association visit to Singapore and Malaysia, during which we visited the Commonwealth war graves there. Perhaps the Minister could write to those organising all the international visits that Parliament is undertaking to ensure that parliamentarians visit war graves around the world as part of the celebrations, particularly this year.”
“Great teaching and great policies saw children in England soar up the international league tables under the last Government to become the best in the western world. I think that the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill risks that progress. If the Secretary of State disagrees, will she put her money where her mouth is and resign if England falls down the international league tables?”
“There are a lot of really good things in this Bill that my right hon. Friend has not mentioned, particularly around tackling violence against women and girls, with the legislation on stalking. Some of that work was carried out cross-party over the past few years, such as on increasing the age of consent for marriage from 16 to 18, and tackling forced marriage issues, hymenoplasty and virginity testing, which I helped put through in the last Parliament. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we should try to convince the Government to introduce legislation around first cousin marriage—a very serious issue—and include in this legislation some of the sexual offences that relate to that?”
“ByteDance, the company that owns TikTok, is required as a Chinese company to have an in-house Chinese Communist party committee. We all know that attacks from China on our national infrastructure as well as on our cyber-networks are becoming increasingly common, and it is clear that elements of the Chinese Government are behind them. Yet, astonishingly, the Government are still failing to fully declare ministerial meetings with TikTok representatives. Will the Minister ensure that meetings with TikTok executives are declared by Government Ministers alongside other senior media executive registrations, given TikTok’s huge presence in the media space, the massive public influence it has and the known cyber-risks posed by this Chinese platform?”
“Friend the Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), in which Ofcom fined GB News 10 times more for doing a question time event with the Conservative party leader than it fined another channel for broadcasting antisemitic tropes. I worry that that attitude towards policing the media, which seems to focus more on politics than prejudice, may act as a barrier to others coming into the sector. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate on the media sector, the role of regulation and freedom in our sector?”
“I declare my interest as vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary media group and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on freedom of speech. Last month I found myself in somewhat rare agreement with the Chancellor when she challenged Britain’s regulators to create a regulatory environment that unlocks innovation and investment. Our media is one the sectors in which we have seen really good growth over the past few years, with huge diversification right across the sector, but there is a concern about the attitude of regulators, which might undermine that growth potential. I think specifically of cases highlighted recently in an opinion piece by my hon.”
“Marriage between first cousins carries significant health issues for their children, many of which are not knowable until post-birth. When practised generation after generation, there is a significant multiplier effect. In addition, the real impacts on the openness of our society and women’s rights in our country are significant. After all, there are significant dynamics in sharing the same set of grandparents. On Friday, this Government have the choice to let my Bill to ban first cousin marriage go through to Committee stage. Will the Prime Minister think again before instructing his Whips to block this legislation?”
“This has caused real confusion among my constituents, particularly the 3,500 who signed a petition led by Justine Norris and Vivienne Conway, and my excellent local councillors, who have been doing all they can to raise the issue. What can Mr Speaker do to ensure that Ministers do not give my constituents accidentally misleading answers and that they correct the record when they make mistakes?”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. There is real concern in Basildon and Billericay about the closure of the South Green surgery. I have raised the matter in Parliament a couple of times, including at oral questions, where the Health Secretary told me it would be a matter for my integrated care board and that he would be happy to make some introductions. However, in response to a written question, the Minister for Care, the hon. Member for Aberafan Maesteg (Stephen Kinnock), told me that new powers under the Health and Care Act 2022 meant that the Secretary of State could intervene under new powers introduced on 31 January 2024.”
“To what extent is the Chancellor concerned about multiple potential breaches by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of its charter since it issued Spotlight 63, which impacts rental housing supply and is causing real concerns among my constituents—both landlords and tenants? Will the Minister meet me urgently to discuss this matter?”
“Government and Opposition Members have asked the Minister several times whether the Chinese ambassador has been summoned to be held to account for these actions. This House deserves an answer from the Minister. A lot of these people face kidnap plots. What investigations are being undertaken into those?”
“The planning proposals for Laindon Road and Mountnessing Road in Billericay and for Noak Bridge were previously rejected because of the green belt aspect but are now being reconsidered under grey belt. Will the Minister urgently meet me, the Billericay Action Group and some of the local councillors to look at the issues around where grey belt is perhaps not being used in the way the Government originally intended?”
“My right hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point about how the Government are giving this away, but we only know that because of what Mauritius is saying to the public. We in this House have been constantly left in the dark—so much so that even when I was recently on “Politics Live” with the Leader of the House, she refused point blank and totally lost the plot when I started to question her about what this Government are doing. Is transparency not absolutely at the core of what we need to hear from the Government?”
“I have just been out in the middle east with the Conservative Friends of Israel—I put that on the record before I ask my question. Given Emily Damari’s personal testimony to the Prime Minister that she was held at United Nations Relief and Works Agency facilities in Gaza during the conflict, and that her captors refused her access to medical treatment, does the Foreign Secretary stand by the Government’s decision to restart sending UK taxpayers’ money to UNRWA when Hamas terrorists were holding British hostages at its facilities, and when it has been crystal clear for months that UNRWA had many members of Hamas in its ranks, including people involved in the 7 October terrorist attacks, who have held hostages ever since?”
“It was interesting to hear the Minister say how humble we on the Conservative Benches should be. Clearly, the Secretary of State for Energy, Security and Net Zero is so humble that he has not even bothered to turn up for this supposedly important statement. It is no more than a smokescreen, as we are seeing energy bills go up yet again. When will my constituents see the £300 energy cut that was promised by the Government? The Minister talked about international markets. Why on earth are this Government not looking again at drilling in the North sea? It is vital that we do so today; then, rather than just helping out a little bit with means-tested benefits, they could perhaps afford to do more for my constituents who are on £12,000 or £13,000 a year, and for pensioners who are losing their winter fuel payments this very year.”
“Does the Solicitor General agree with the recent Policy Exchange research paper “Conflicts of Interest and the Law Officers’ Convention” authored by Dr Conor Casey, a senior lecturer at Surrey law school, and supported by three former Ministers who are all KCs, that invoking the Law Officers’ convention on questions about the potential conflict of interest relating to the work of the Attorney General would be an error, as such questions do not fall within the scope of the convention?”
“We can all appreciate the need for public procurement reform and the fact that the Government are taking forward this work, which was initially set out by the previous Conservative Government. However, the Government should offer a little more certainty and clarity about the extent of trade union involvement in the public procurement pipeline and the extent to which they will preserve the potential for small and medium-sized businesses to have a fair go at the bidding process and involvement in that pipeline. If the Minister will write to me on those points, I will be happy not to oppose the regulations.”
“As the Minister will know, public procurement involves not just large businesses that have the capacity to maintain a stringent Government social value and trade union requirement but lots of small businesses that can offer fitting and cost-effective services and products but that might not have the broader capabilities to uphold some of those tight requirements. Previously, the Minister appeared to confirm to me that small enterprises would be exempt from those requirements and I would appreciate her confirmation of that, as well as her understanding of how exactly that will fit in to the cost-saving and efficiency measures set out by the Act, in which small and medium-sized businesses can play a central role. Anything in that regard would be appreciated.”
“As the TUC has pointed out, that Act means that public bodies must consult and work with unions and: “Attempts to shirk this duty, or lock unions out from decision-making can no longer be done without consequence” securing the “place of trade unions as essential partners in public policymaking.” Is it the Government’s view that the NPPS, implemented through the Procurement Act, will ensure that trade unions cannot be locked out of decision making without consequence? We also know that the Government have set out their intention for a social value council, as in Wales. I would appreciate some further clarity on the expected make-up of the council.”
“Of course, I regret the fact that the Government have delayed the implementation of the measures contained within the Procurement Act, and I hope that their new national procurement policy statement will not interfere with its core efficiency and cost improvement measures. I want to ask the Minister when exactly we can expect the updated NPPS. I also want to briefly raise a couple of concerns about the measures that the Government have previously indicated will be in the updated statement. The Labour party’s make work pay plan, which sets out the most exact information we have as to the content of the updated NPPS, suggests that the new principle of procurement will be based on learning from the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act 2023.”
“It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Mundell. It is also a delight to be with the Minister who is losing her DL plates today—[Hon. Members: “Oh!”] I thought that was pretty good with two minutes’ notice. We will not be opposing the draft instrument. The core Procurement Act was introduced under the Conservative Government to consolidate and simplify existing procurement legislation, improve efficiencies throughout the process and improve transparency throughout the procurement pipeline. There remain a number of big challenges with public procurement, which represents hundreds of billions of pounds of public body expenditure every year. I hope that the legislation coming into force in February will help to tackle those challenges.”
“Does the Minister consider incredibly high rates of first-cousin marriage in certain communities, which are up to a hundred times that found in the general population, an equalities issue? What discussions has she had with the Ministry of Justice about that?”
“I welcome the Minister coming to the House to answer the urgent question, because the argument she is putting forward seems slightly confused. First, women’s health hubs seem to be working on the whole, and there are lots of them, so why remove the target for everybody to have them if we are already 90% there? Secondly, many of the hubs seem to be doing good work, and best practice is clearly emerging, so why cancel the target for the programme rather than spread that good practice throughout the system? I think the broad question from the Opposition is: why remove the targets specifically relating to women from the Government’s agenda going forward? It feels to many women and to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, which has been in contact with me, that that downgrades the status of women in the NHS.”
“Yesterday, I re-established the all-party parliamentary group on freedom of speech. I am sure Members on the Government Front Bench will welcome that, given their recent slight changes of opinion on free speech in higher education. Will the Leader of the House find space in Government time for a broader debate on freedom of speech, given that her neighbour, the hon. Member for Blackley and Middleton South (Graham Stringer), is the deputy chairman of the APPG? In addition, will she clarify what she said at the start of business questions about the lower Thames crossing getting the go-ahead? My understanding is that the development consent order has not yet been passed; in fact, it has been delayed twice. That clarity will be important for people in constituencies like mine, who are eagerly awaiting the Government’s actions in that area.”
“I appreciate that the hon. Lady is talking about a preferential voting system, rather than a proportional voting system. Does she understand that there is quite a big difference between those two options, and obviously today’s debate is about proportional representation?”
“The Minister makes a broader important point about the mandate that individual MPs feel when they are elected to this place. Does she agree that that individual mandate—our names are on the ballot paper—is strengthened under the first-past-the-post system? Does she also agree that that means that our electorate can single out MPs, which could not happen under a party-list system, in order to remove them?”
“The hon. Member makes an excellent point, and I think the nub of his speech is that post offices are not just a banking facility or just a post office; they are a real community hub. I think about the ones in my constituency that I have visited recently—in Ramsden Bellhouse, on Whitmore Way in Basildon or the brand new one on Billericay high street. That is exactly what they are: places where the entire community comes together.”
“This is exactly the issue facing my constituency, where two proposed large developments are going through planning, one on Wash Road on the outskirts of Noak Bridge, and the other—it went through a couple of weeks ago—on Laindon Road in Billericay. There are huge pressures on local services; local primary schools are overflowing. When we see our local authorities changing from two-tier to unitary and being moved around, there is real concern that section 106 money will not even go towards the needs of the communities having housing imposed on them. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that adds extra complexity to the situation?”
“My right hon. Friend is being very generous in giving way. My question touches on that point about the balance between urban and rural. Semi-rural and rural areas are now being densified, and given the changes in the requirements on new buildings, places such as London are seeing less extra densification. Does he agree that the Government should be looking at schemes such as the one up at Finsbury Park, to which the Industry and Parliament Trust will take us on a visit in the next few weeks? A post-war estate of 2,000 homes is being transformed into 5,500 homes. That is proper urban densification around a major existing transport hub, and it means that those houses are not being built in the green-belt areas that he is talking about.”
“There is nothing in the statement about the lower Thames crossing, which has already been delayed twice by this Government. The crossing is one of the biggest infrastructure projects and will have a huge impact on the entire country. For my constituents, the biggest issues around growth have been about the taxes on business—particularly on family companies—and the jobs tax. Why are the Government not addressing those real issues, which were not addressed in the statement?”
“In this case in particular, given that the Prime Minister had faced particular criticism, some Members may have felt that his own PPS was trying to talk up his record in response to the situation.”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Yesterday, during Justice questions, the Prime Minister’s Parliamentary Private Secretary, the hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist), raised the subject of the Government’s response to the horrific attacks in Southport. The Government’s response was led by the Prime Minister at the time. May I seek your guidance on the question of PPSs of Prime Ministers and other Ministers raising issues that correspond directly with their Ministers’ areas of competence, and on what I can do to ensure that the Speaker’s Office provides further clarity for PPSs so that they do not inadvertently speak in the House about issues that they should not be raising?”
“I believe in second chances, and perhaps even more chances in some cases, but the excellent Policy Exchange report, “The ‘Wicked and the Redeemable’: A Long-Term Plan to Fix a Criminal Justice System in Crisis” found that hyper-prolific offenders—those with more than 45 previous convictions—are sent to prison on fewer than half of the occasions on which they are convicted of a subsequent indictable or either-way offence. Given that those people commit such high numbers of crimes, which usually affect our least affluent constituents, what consideration have the Government given to the report’s recommendations, particularly on introducing a mandatory two-year sentence for hyper-prolific offenders who are convicted of a subsequent indictable or either-way offence?”
“16. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill on the early years sector.”
“Early years providers are being hammered. In many cases, their national insurance costs per staff member are almost doubling. A large number are small businesses in the private sector, while others are schools that are taking children before they go into reception classes. All of them—both primary schools in the state sector and small private providers—are worried about the extra costs being imposed on them. Can the Minister assure my constituents and, indeed, people throughout the country that families will not face higher costs and that those childcare places will still be there? Can he assure the House that we will have more childcare places at the end of this Parliament than we had at the start of it?”
“Unbelievably, the Treasury Committee has already raised concerns about the Office for Value for Money, citing issues around its remit, cost, cross-Government duplication and more, which could be expressed concisely as fears around the value for money of Labour’s new Office for Value for Money. Does the Minister agree with the financial markets, which do not believe this Government’s commitment to reforming public procurement or to prudent financial management, which is why they have added a Reeves ratio to the UK Government’s debt, costing taxpayers an extra £10 billion a year?”
“Labour came to office promising to kick-start growth. Instead, it has kicked growth into the gutter. Over the last few months we have seen some of the slowest growth in the G7—in the actual figures rather than the projections. Where will the money for the public sector and public services come from with zero economic growth?”
“It is limited and sensible, and simplifying the process to allow pubs to open for key moments that bind our country together, whether it is a national celebration, a sporting event or a royal wedding, is a sensible step forward. There are obviously bigger factors to decide whether pubs in this country stay open—this is not the day to go into VAT, national insurance and so on—but, through this Bill, the hon. Member for Wrexham presents the House with a real opportunity to make a meaningful difference and support our pubs in an immediate and practical way for the future. The Licensing Hours Extensions Bill is a targeted measure to allow pubs to remain open during those moments that can really instil national pride in our country and bring us together in our public houses.”
“From traditional pubs in Basildon and Billericay, such as the Chequers on Billericay High Street, to the more modern Beehive in Basildon, the bar at the Laindon Community Centre and the taproom at the Billericay Brewery, local pubs across our communities come in all shapes and sizes. Hard-working landlords, owners and staff make these local institutions what they are. Our pubs have faced a tough time. During the last Parliament, I won the parliamentarian of the year award from the all-party parliamentary beer group for my work to push forward on the draught beer duty relief. This Bill is another small but important step to help our pubs.”
“I will try to be brief. I thank the hon. Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger) for bringing forward this important Bill. Pubs are incredibly important places for more than just enjoying a drink: they are at the heart of local communities up and down the country and bring people together in a truly unique way, which is ever more important in this modern world. The sector is also an integral part of our cultural heritage and a significant contributor to our economy, with almost 1 million people working in it. Like the hon. Gentleman, I started my working life in licensed premises.”
“Basildon council has put forward a new local plan, with a consultation that closed just a few days ago, for 27,000 homes right across the borough—the majority of which are in my constituency—covering a huge quantity of that green belt. There are 25% more homes this year on the green belt, because this Labour Government cut the need for housing in London by 17,000 properties a year and increased it in the home counties by 18,000 properties a year. All those extra properties will be heading to the green belt in constituencies such as mine across Essex and the south of England.”
“I am delighted to have secured this debate after entering the ballot many times. The origins of the green belt go back certainly to the start of the last century, but perhaps even further, because in 1580 Elizabeth I tried to impose a block on building within three miles of the City of London, in order to prevent the spread of plague. Today, I will talk a little about the Green Belt (London and Home Counties) Act 1938, the Town and Country Planning Act 1947, and a large area of land now known as the green belt. Almost two thirds of undeveloped land in the Basildon borough is green belt, covering some 6,590 hectares. Why this debate today?”
“I am concerned about what this insidious grey belt phrasing could mean for developments right across the country. The Government will ask where the housing should go. London is a third less dense than Paris. It seems mad that we are building on virgin greenfield sites rather than densifying our cities, especially at a time when constituents in Essex and across the country are having to cross-subsidise the Mayor of London for his transport. They do not get access to it, but they have to pay for it. If we had greater density in our cities, some of those transport routes would be able to fund themselves.”
“I certainly agree, and I was about to move on to that point. None of us on the Opposition Benches is against more housing, but often that housing does not come about because of local need in our constituencies. This is about a Government shying away from difficult conversations about densification in our cities, a mayor who has consistently failed to deliver on his own housing targets, and a failure to redevelop crucial brownfield land in the centre and on the edges of our major cities. My hon. Friend’s point about the grey belt is particularly important at the moment, because the council is starting to redesignate large areas of my constituency. Just a few years ago, those areas were grade 1 or grade 2 agricultural land. Now, they are being designated as grey belt, despite never having had any buildings on them.”