Mr Richard Holden
MP for Basildon and Billericay · Conservative · United Kingdom
“I associate myself with the comments of the Secretary of State about the Spanish rail crash. On 18 June, the Secretary of State said in a statement that the Heathrow expansion is “critical to national growth”. On 27 September the Prime Minister said, however: “Principally, it’s a matter for London and Londoners”.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I really welcome the Government’s U-turn on adopting Conservative policy and deciding to review airport drop-off charges, but in response to my written question, the Minister did not confirm that the Government’s anti-car surface access targets, the more than 100% increase in business rates that many airports have faced, or the crippling…”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for that clarification. Last week, Chancellor Merz set out his plans to scrap the ban on petrol and diesel cars across the EU, saying, “We stand by drivers. We stand with our industry.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Whenever the moment arrives to top up a budget or dish out another handout, those Members are there. I hope that the Bill will stir a new feeling in those Members, and that the blinkers will fall from their eyes.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am delighted to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. Just after the second world war, in May ’46, the first commercial flights departed Heathrow, marking the beginning of an 80-year journey that has seen over 3 billion passengers move through the airport and take 22 million flights.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Time and again, I meet constituents in Basildon and Billericay who need support, or those on the other side, who are being squeezed more and more by higher taxes—people who work long hours, but who see their bills rise as they try to support their family. Why are my constituents not more deserving of our attention?”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
2,334 held · 2,322 searchable for Mr Richard Holden. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 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.
“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.”
House of Commons5 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons5 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons27 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons27 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons23 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let us support it and work towards a thriving and resilient pub sector.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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?”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“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.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are also community oriented and have stayed in Essex to raise their family or moved to Essex from London for the green space and greater sense of community. The level of building proposed is on a scale completely out of whack with what other parts of the country away from the south-east face.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, there are serious concerns about existing and future local services and infrastructure, if this housing goes on the green belt. Thirdly, there will be a need for even more physical infrastructure on whatever remains of the green belt to cope with the proposed development, leading to its further erosion in the future. Fourthly, local residents have broader concerns about why the plan is being rushed through so quickly with the destruction of so much green belt, while our local councils have a gun to their head in respect of the Government’s devolution plans. I want to be clear: residents of Basildon and Billericay are not against development per se. They are entrepreneurial, hard-working people who love their area.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will result in the emergence of a contiguous conurbation all the way from Shoeburyness, through the Thames gateway corridor and my constituency, into Brentwood and then through London all the way to Uxbridge on the other side. Essentially, the area from Heathrow airport to Southend airport will become part of that contiguous conurbation. What I have to say about the green belt rests on so many conversations I have had with county, borough, town and parish councillors, but overwhelmingly on conversations with local residents across my constituency. My argument rests on four main points. First, there is overwhelming opposition to the proposals, especially in the context of London seeing a reduction in its housing targets.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is right to make that point. The Mayor of London is being rewarded for failure, just as he was with his knighthood not that long ago. My constituents, many of whom grew up in the area or moved there for the green space nearby, now feel that they face seeing their communities concreted over because of the Mayor of London’s failure. The green belt was designated by Conservative Governments in the 1930s and Labour Governments in the 1940s. One cannot talk about it today in the context of Basildon and Billericay without talking about Basildon council’s disastrous local plan, which is built on the destruction of the green belt.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are not against development; they are just against the wholesale destruction of their communities by a Government who do not seem to understand or care about them.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I urge the Government to think very carefully. Once the green belt has gone, it cannot be changed back. We need to think again, especially as we face massive local government reform over the next couple of years, pushed forward by this Government. So many properties are being proposed locally for building on green belt land. That means irreversible destruction, and the merging of towns and villages across Basildon borough. It is hardly surprising that local people are outraged by the loss of their green belt. I have yet to find anyone in my area who supports the proposal. The people of Basildon and Billericay, Laindon, Crays Hill, Noak Bridge, Noak Hill, the Bursteads and Ramsden Bellhouse want the green belt to be protected to keep their communities special.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is before we even come to the A127 or A13, which run east-west through my constituency or just outside it, and are major arterial routes for the entire region. The green belt is already massively at stake, and I do not want to see it further at stake. I do not want to see massive new road building programmes, but they will have to happen if the Government’s proposals go ahead. Before I close, I want to mention the future-proofing of these plans. We are seeing the Government push for devolution across the country, and nowhere more so than in Essex. The local plan that has been proposed, with all this churning up of our green belt, may well not be what is wanted by the council that the Government are basically going to impose on us, with a new unitary authority and a mayor, in a couple of years.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“All that extra building on the green belt in constituencies such as mine will just put more pressure on those local services. That brings me to the need for more physical infrastructure. At the moment, Tye Common Road in my constituency is basically the last bit of green space we see before we get to the greater conurbation of London. That is not going to exist—in the next few years, it will be carpeted with huge amounts of new building. Small local roads that are already over capacity, all of which go through the green belt, will have to be expanded. Whether it is the A129, the A176 or Tye Common Road, which go between Basildon and Billericay, the massive expansion of those roads will further damage the green belt.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are already seeing acute pressures on primary care services in south Essex, and yet we are expected to take potentially tens of thousands more residents, without any clear guidance from the Government on what will happen or any plans for where the additional health services we will require would be. We have seen recently in the borough a lack of support from Basildon council’s leadership for Conservative councillors in Burstead and Billericay who are trying to push back on plans to close South Green surgery. Police and fire services are another classic example of where we already face big pressures. The infrastructure required for the fire service and police service to respond within the required times is already being stretched to breaking point.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They will be footnotes in the history of Labour’s plans to build, build, build. There are serious concerns about local education provision, as we already have oversubscribed primary schools. That is particularly acute when it comes to special educational needs, with some of the services being in the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois). There are already major pressures on our green belt from the housing plan, and we are not seeing the services to go alongside it. That is particularly difficult for the green belt, because the only place where those services can be built is in that green-belt space. With the plans the council has put forward, what we are seeing is just the start of the erosion of our green belt. Healthcare is another major concern for local people.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As you can imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker, there is overwhelming local opposition to this. Central Government should be concentrating on densification of brownfield sites. There is a real fear that when the green belt is gone, the green sites left in the constituency will face immense pressure—places such Norsey Wood in Billericay, which will be the only green space for so many local residents. The pressure on the green spaces that remain will be huge, because none of the alternatives will exist. If this plan is accepted, even with modifications, the towns and villages of the Basildon borough will become part of an amorphous mass. Villages such as Little Burstead, Great Burstead and South Green, Ramsden Bellhouse, Crays Hill and Noak Bridge just will not exist any more.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is absolutely correct. It would basically mean the merging of Wickford in his constituency with Basildon, as part of the continuous conglomeration of building that would go all the way through Greater London. Earlier this week, the Minister for Local Government and English Devolution said in answer to my question that Basildon and Billericay residents should be proud of their council and its plans for 27,000 more properties. If every constituency in England was being asked to take what Basildon and Billericay is being asked to take, the Government would have a housing target of 12 million homes by 2040. We are bearing more than our fair share and more than is necessary. It is difficult to see how that is justified when housing targets are being cut for London.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister reflect on the concerns I have raised, and that have been raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) in previous debates, about the huge changes we face locally with devolution? Who will be accountable for local plans when the council that is ramming them through will not even exist in the near future? There is real concern that this is like a hit job being done on our local communities.”
House of Commons17 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Finally—thank you for your indulgence, Madam Deputy Speaker—we must not lose sight of the fact that there are shifting landscapes, and our response will be a long-term thing. I appreciate the Government’s response today, but they have not yet responded to last year’s House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee report on reforming the process by which public inquiries are conducted. That is slightly overdue, so if the right hon. Gentleman could update us on progress on that, I would be most grateful. We must ensure that the tracker is in place so that on issues such as this, the Horizon scandal or the infected blood scandal, we are always in the right place.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In response to recommendation 9, the red groups sounded good, but I was a little worried when he said, “We are establishing eight advisory groups to combat group-think.” That sounds a little like a tautology. I want to ensure that those groups will be properly independent and that the Government are challenged on their plans. On recommendation 7, there was an important point around reporting back the findings of the nationwide investigations. On the publishing and timeliness, the report asked for three-month publications—will the Minister speak to that? The Cabinet Office said that it is scoping and testing solutions to resolve multi-agency reports. Will he speak to that?”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On recommendation 3, the Minister mentioned mapping, which is very welcome, but will he expand a little on the combined impacts of different vulnerabilities for certain groups and how they can be overlaid in that mapping process? On recommendations 4 and 5 on the whole system emergency strategy and, crucially, that data element, is there data to support the strategy? What confidence does he have in that at the moment? Will he use the UK Biobank for that? There are critical issues around academic freedom as we look into very complex issues, and overlapping issues within communities across the country. On recommendation 6, what response has the Minister had so far from the devolved Governments? He said that they have been very positive, but could he go a little further?”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I recognise in the Government’s response the desire to ensure independent input into the whole-system civil emergency preparedness and resilience and, in doing so, establish a number of expert advisory groups, but I caution them that that must be backed up by real accountability and progress tracking, to ensure that the work conducted by those teams is enacted transparently and for clear reasons. They must not be just talking shops. The Government have announced a significant number of reviews, consultations and taskforces, but without real accountability and framework clarity, they risk being only a temporary solution to long-term issues. That is a particular concern when it comes to national resilience. Although we support the Government’s direction, I want to raise a couple of questions.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that the pandemic exercise will involve cross-cutting segments of microbial resistance and technology infrastructure, which will be key challenges that continue to grow in importance. The Government have also emphasised the holistic work that can be conducted across all types of organisations as a result of the highly transparent risk register that we first published in 2023. I appreciate that they are setting out their intention to build on that, and offer a wider range of scenarios and frameworks to the register in future. However, they do not seem to fully recognise that there is far too much complication in the system, which risks masking fundamental matters of cross-governmental co-ordination with political measures.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that the steps that the Government have set out will successfully build on that. I am also thankful that they are building on the last Government’s work to lay the foundations of the resilience academy, and I look forward to tracking that progress. It is important to note that the Government intend to strengthen the articulation of requirements for resilience and emergency training qualifications. I am thankful that they are building on the work that we implemented to establish a new national exercising programme, and are planning a full pandemic exercise for this year. Importantly, we need to recognise that the risks that we will face will be dynamic, because we do not know what the future will hold.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government’s response has identified a number of overarching implementations from the module recommendations. We are broadly supportive of the Government’s direction. As the inquiry report notes, it is important to strengthen cross-governmental communication and data sharing, and communication and co-ordination between devolved Administrations. I appreciate that the Government recognise that and are taking forward the recommendation to ensure that the Cabinet Office has a clearer and stronger role in crisis and resilience co-ordination. The Government have clearly signalled their intention to build on the work started under the last Government, who put together the resilience directorate within the Cabinet Office with the goal of ensuring clear accountability and leadership for long-term resilience and crisis planning.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement, and I join his tribute to Baroness Hallett for her report. We all know how challenging the pandemic was. Sadly, far too many lives were lost—I pay tribute to all the victims from across our country and the world. That is why the Conservative Government put in place the inquiry, and former Ministers have been co-operating with its work—I thank the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster for acknowledging that. It is clear from the inquiry’s investigations and findings so far that response times and processes were too slow and disjointed—we recognise that—but it is also clear that there was an incredibly challenging process and no easy answers. Module 1 examined our country’s pandemic resilience and preparedness, so I will focus on that.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Across Basildon and Billericay, my residents are concerned about the idea of two years of delay while massive reorganisation goes on locally. Will the Minister provide reassurance that the local plan for 27,000 new houses across the area, which has just been consulted on, will not suddenly be rushed through by a local council that will not exist in future, with residents having to live with the consequences for years to come?”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the words from the Secretary of State around freedom of speech today—she knows that I have asked about this in the House previously—and I also welcome the partial U-turn. Will she join me, though, in thanking the academics who have really put pressure on the Government to get to this position, and also the work of the Free Speech Union? Will she encourage all academic institutions to sign up to the Chicago principles? Can she give us a brief timeline on when the foreign influence registration scheme could come forward? Finally, I will be setting up the all-party parliamentary group on freedom of speech in the coming weeks. Will the Secretary of State agree to come along and speak to us about this at some point?”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is making an important point. Does she agree that this House has to legislate in order to lead cultural change in our country? Furthermore, does she support some of the work that the Government are doing in exactly that direction?”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Labour Members would do well to take serious notice of the discontent displayed by Mr Westwood and by the over 3 million people who signed the petition. Otherwise, not only will trust in the Government fall further, but we will continue to decline and this Government will face nothing but further anger and further disappointment from the public.”
House of Commons6 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗