Nadia Whittome
MP for Nottingham East · Labour · United Kingdom
“My hon. Friend is making an incredibly emotional speech. I know, from the Nottingham maternity review, the harm and hurt that is caused when people with knowledge and involvement in institutional failures are allowed to dodge accountability and scrutiny.”
“There is little evidence that the Bill will do what it claims and fix the most serious issues in our asylum system. In fact, experts say that it will divert focus and resources to a system that is unfair, unsafe and unworkable.”
“The Government could have brought forward a Bill containing evidence-based policies that would fix our broken asylum system—for example, a not-for-profit asylum accommodation system to improve living conditions and integration, genuinely safe routes that are not severely restricted and heavily capped, and fast tracking of obviously well-f…”
“That undermines the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers, which are key cornerstones of our democracy. The Law Society says that it risks “more wrong decisions, more court challenges, higher costs and longer uncertainty.” Poor Home Office decision making drives the appeals backlog.”
“It is great to hear my right hon. Friend supporting schemes like Homes for Ukraine. The reason we do not see Ukrainians crossing the channel on small boats is because, rightly, we have a safe and legal route.”
“The continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied west bank and East Jerusalem is having a profound impact on Palestinian communities, where military violence and attacks by extremist idealogues are spiralling.”
The complete record
Every one of 551 lines we hold for Nadia Whittome, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 12.
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I am grateful to you for fitting me back into the call list and for allowing me to go and tend to my migraine. I promise I will not take any longer than two minutes— I do not think my head would allow it anyway. It is important for me to speak in the debate, because poor air quality is a silent public health crisis that is harming the lives of my constituents. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Jeff Smith) for securing the debate. Public Health England figures show that over 6% of adult deaths in Nottingham are attributable to manmade air pollution. That is more deaths than from alcohol and road traffic accidents combined. More than 400 people in my city die prematurely every year because of the quality of the air that they breathe.”
“We have a responsibility to vote for these amendments and to treat people—our neighbours, our friends, our co-workers—who were born on a different soil in the way that we would want to be treated ourselves and the way that we would want our families to be treated.”
“Whether you are a retired miner from Mansfield, a Deliveroo rider in Nottingham or a Bulgarian mum who cleans this very building, we have more in common with one another than we ever will with those who try to divide us. We all want to protect our families. We all want to contribute to our communities. We all know what it is like to have no power, and we all know that it is Ministers who are making people powerless. We have an enormous privilege as Members of this House, but being paid £80k a year does not make our lives worth any more than those of people being paid £8.72 an hour.”
“Our key workers are not low skilled; they are underpaid. They should be rewarded with a pay rise, not threatened with deportation. The purpose of the Bill is to close our borders with Europe. Those who make over £25,600 a year will be allowed in, and those who are paid less will be kept out. That is what a points-based system looks like. It is free movement for those who can afford it and a hostile environment for everyone else. This Bill will not solve the problems my community faces. It is not foreigners taking away jobs; it is this Government refusing to extend the furlough scheme. It is not migrants running the NHS into the ground; they are keeping it going. If the Minister is so committed to increasing wages, I urge him to listen to the Migration Advisory Committee and increase the wages of care workers to at least £10 an hour.”
“When I was a care worker, I worked alongside talented and dedicated carers from Zambia, Spain, Italy; we worked long hours to look after elderly people, yet the Government have the cheek to call them low skilled and to say that they do not belong here. When I went back to work during the pandemic, I had to retrain. My day would look like this: getting up at five; making notes during handover; administering medication; dealing with someone who had had a fall; hoisting someone twice my size, and being alert at all times to small changes that might indicate a serious medical problem. I would try my best to brighten someone’s day and make them feel valued, knowing that I would probably be the only person they saw that day, all while meticulously recording everything that happened on every call.”
“It is a privilege to follow the hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Virginia Crosbie), who speaks with expertise and passion about healthcare in her constituency. It is a privilege, too, to speak to Lords amendment 1, which would require an independent assessment of the impact of ending free movement on the social care sector. It was not so long ago that everyone in this House hailed our key workers as heroes and we stood on our doorsteps and clapped for our carers. It is care workers, cleaners, cooks and delivery drivers who keep this country running, but they are also the people this Bill would keep out of the country. One in five health and social care workers was born outside the UK.”
“That means a serious economic package to protect jobs and businesses, and fixing the privatised Serco test and trace system. Are the Government so wedded to privatisation that even when it is utterly failing and public health is at risk they just plough on? We also need to extend the eviction ban so that no one loses their home during this time. We know that lockdowns work only if people can afford to self-isolate, so why is it that, eight months into this virus, statutory sick pay is still £95 a week? The Secretary of State said that he could not live on that, so why are my constituents expected to? My final question to the Minister, in the last few seconds, is why have the Government not even followed their own scientific advice, which was to ban households mixing, close pubs and bring all university teaching online?”
“They failed to implement a test and trace system and they failed to listen to the OECD’s advice that the best way to protect the economy was to prevent a second wave, instead telling people one minute to go out to pubs, to eat out to help out, and then blaming them for doing so the next. The Government prioritised the interests of the economy over saving lives, yet failed to do both, and we are now faced with the worst recession in the developed world. Last week, MPs, councillors and members of the public were left to find out in the press that we were due to go under a local lockdown, without any details of what that would look like for residents and for businesses. People in Nottingham have made enormous sacrifices during this pandemic, but frankly people are fed up. People want the Government to do their part.”
“A week ago, Nottingham showed for the first time a dramatic increase in our covid-19 infection rate. We needed immediate action from the Government, but all we got was confusion and delay. We were left in the dark for a week, with no action and no communication from the Government, and during that time the infection rate doubled to be the highest in the country. The saddest thing about that is that it was avoidable. The Government have failed us time and again during this crisis. They failed to protect elderly people and vulnerable people, who died at an alarming rate in care homes and nursing homes.”
“The Government must make a just transition to a lower- carbon economy and, in doing so, create green jobs. Will the Minister outline the number of green jobs created since he has been in post, and specifically which green technologies and industries can expect investment from the Government over the next year?”
“The Secretary of State will be aware that in recent years, there has been increased understanding of neurodivergent people and the issues that neurodivergence presents in the criminal justice system, yet there are still neurodivergent individuals who face disproportionate prison sentences and who, in the case of foreign national offenders, could risk deportation to a country where they have no support. Will he commit himself to immediately reviewing all cases of neurodivergent individuals, particularly those who face imminent deportation?”
“The Government’s posturing will do nothing to protect the millions of workers in all four nations across the country who are worried about losing their jobs; nothing to reassure the British farmers who are worried about their products being undercut and dangerous trade deals that lower food standards; and nothing to foster the international co-operation that we need to defeat this pandemic or tackle the climate crisis. I urge people who have spoken passionately about our food, environmental and trading standards, and the Union, to vote for new clause 2 so that the Bill does not ride roughshod over our devolved nations, and so that it resembles something that is fit for purpose.”
“It is about the Government allowing themselves to sell off our rights and protections in dangerous trade deals that will undermine our future for decades to come. Meanwhile, when we tried to amend the Trade Bill at least to ensure parliamentary scrutiny, the Government rejected that, showing very clearly what taking back control actually means—not parliamentary sovereignty, but an Executive power grab. Now with this Bill, especially in its current, unamended form, the Government are trying to cement that power grab by giving themselves the right to impose lower standards on devolved nations while ripping up the withdrawal agreement that they so proudly campaigned on just nine months ago, and breaking international law in the process.”
“There is a pattern here: the Government promise to maintain our standards while simultaneously passing laws to allow themselves to lower them. Let us take, for example, the Environment Bill, which the Government used not to set targets, but to give themselves the power to set their own targets in the future. They voted against the principle of non-regression to stop environmental standards being lowered. We have also heard about agriculture today. The Agriculture Bill offered nothing to guarantee that food standards would not be lowered and undercut in new trade deals. Hon. Members might be wondering why the Government would keep making promises and then refuse to legislate for them. The agenda is pretty clear to me. This is about creating a race-to-the-bottom economy. It is about undermining our standards.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Graham, and to speak to new clause 2, which was tabled by Labour’s Front Benchers. This new clause seeks to put common frameworks on a statutory footing. Only yesterday the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster reassured Members of the importance of common frameworks. If that is the case, I expect the Government to have no problem in accepting this amendment, which seeks to prevent Ministers from overriding and imposing lower standards on devolved nations against their will. However, the devolved nations have every reason to be worried because when it comes to empty words, meaningless platitudes and empty promises, I am afraid that this Government have form.”
“A report last year by the Foreign Affairs Committee, of which the Home Secretary was a member at the time, said: “In the absence of robust and accessible legal routes for seeking asylum in the UK, those with a claim are left with little choice but to make dangerous journeys by land and sea.” How many more people like Abdulfatah Hamdallah have to die before the Home Secretary creates those safe and legal routes?”
“Successive Conservative Equalities Ministers have repeatedly stalled on publishing the results of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 consultation. Leaked reports of a potential roll-back on trans rights have understandably caused alarm. With hate crimes against trans people up nearly 40% on last year, does the Minister agree that her quibbling on this issue is fanning the flames of populist hate towards an already marginalised group?”
“My hon. Friend may have been about to make the point that analysis from the Women’s Budget Group shows that over 2 million jobs could be created in the care sector, which is more than are being created by any of the Chancellor’s schemes today. Does she agree that the Government should meet the Women’s Budget Group to address this clear oversight in their policy making?”
“Covid-19 has shown that we all have the ability to make drastic changes to our way of life, when necessary. We must learn from these changes, not merely return to the old habits and old ways of thinking, and that goes for Government too. As a minimum, any company support package from the Government must ensure there is a clear commitment to tackling climate change. Will the Minister commit to the principle of public money for public goods today, and will the Minister commit to a comprehensive training, jobs and investment programme built around net zero and the circular economy—a green industrial revolution?”
“In the light of what we have seen, or not seen, from the Government on climate change and the environment, I am somewhat sceptical about their new-found love for interventionist approaches. Analysis shows that policies opposed by the Government to date on onshore wind, offshore wind power, home installation, tidal power and transport would have led to nearly 70 million tonnes of CO 2 emissions savings per year by 2030. The UK is off track to hit our latest carbon budget emissions targets. We are missing most of our international biodiversity targets, and Natural England and the Environment Agency have been cut so severely that they are barely able even to fulfil their basic statutory functions. In the context of all this, the Cabinet Committee launched to co-ordinate climate policy has, remarkably, met just once.”
“Just as the UK was not prepared for the covid-19 pandemic, so the Government are failing adequately to prepare and protect people from the effects of climate change. What are the latest Treasury estimates for the cost of the likely damage to communities, food, food production, and industry as a result of climate change and environmental degradation over the next five to 10 years? Although I welcome several of the measures touted to make the Chancellor’s Budget tomorrow, particularly the green homes grant scheme, a responsible approach to the climate and environmental emergency will require far more than just one or two eye-catching measures and a few slogans. To say that anything less than systemic, transformative fundamental change to society, the economy and lifestyles is needed would be to peddle a dangerous and reckless myth.”
“I wish to close with words from the End Violence Against Women Coalition, which has stressed that “Amending the Bill is the only route to guarantee a fair system to all victims” and ensure compliance with the Istanbul convention, which this Bill seeks to ratify.”
“However, as Pragna Patel, the director of Southall Black Sisters, has said: “The decision to leave migrant women out of this bill sends the message that their lives are not valued, they are disposable, they are second-class people, they are invisible”. This invisibility is exacerbated through clause 53, which neglects the commissioning of specialist support for BAME women in the community. There are only 30 specialist by and for black and minoritised women’s refuges for the whole of the UK, with 50% of BAME specialist refuges having been forced to close or been taken over by a larger provider because of Government funding cuts in the past decade.”
“The draft statutory guidance to accompany this Bill clearly recognises that migrant women face these additional obstacles to safety and are afraid of reporting. Does the Minister accept that the Government’s current policies in this area in effect encode and entrench the abuser-victim dynamic into the system? Will she acknowledge that the legislation, as it currently stands, does not match the facts recognised in the statutory guidance? It is promising that some key amendments have made the cut, including the recognition that children are victims of domestic abuse in their own right, as well as the expansion of the ban on abusers cross-examining the victims in court.”
“No recourse to public funds renders many of the most at-risk individuals completely powerless and increases their chances of being preyed upon by abusers or falling into destitution. The choice presented to Members today is whether this Bill progresses with or without leaving migrant women behind. Many migrant women are, in effect, excluded from the protective measures in this Bill as they have no recourse to public funds. What advice has the Minister sought as to whether the Bill, in its current form, is compliant with paragraph 3 of article 4 of the Istanbul convention? We know that migrant women face additional barriers to safety, because abusers commonly weaponise fears of immigration enforcement and separation from their children to control them.”
“It is an honour to follow the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price). I wholeheartedly support the sensible and necessary amendments to this Bill brought forward by several of my courageous and learned colleagues. I particularly wish to mention my hon. Friend the Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield), who has spoken courageously on domestic abuse, and my excellent colleague my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Stella Creasy), because of her ongoing work to have misogyny treated as a hate crime. I am proud to represent Nottingham East, the birthplace of the movement to recognise misogyny as a hate crime, and I pay tribute to pioneers at Nottingham Women’s Centre, as well as Juno Women’s Aid, and, in particular, to Mel Jeffs.”
“We must not forget that this Bill arrives before us today in the context of the Conservatives’ hostile environment—a hostile environment conjured as a pernicious smokescreen to blame migrants for the economic damage inflicted on working-class communities by Tory austerity, predatory capitalism and years of neglect and lack of investment.”
“Ultimately, nobody should be imprisoned because of where they were born, yet the UK is the only country in Europe that does not have a time limit on how long a person can be held in immigration detention. Twenty-eight days is absolutely the longest time allowed in any other context. I urge the Government to do the right thing, even at this late hour. They should not block the many sensible amendments and new clauses. Carers, shop assistants and cleaners are risking their lives on the frontline looking after us. The least we can do for them is to use our votes today to look after them.”
“Will the Minister, for the avoidance of doubt, clarify whether the Home Secretary still considers care workers low skilled? A recent report, “Detained and Dehumanised”, is based on interviews with people who experienced detention in UK centres. It was done before the pandemic. The report highlights a disturbing level of despair. One person said: “I saw people cutting themselves, someone who tried to hang himself, someone who died in detention”. Another said: “The most awful thing was an uncertainty: Not knowing whether I will be released and what they’re going to do to me”. As the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis) has said, this is a terrible, inhumane position to be in.”
“Does the Minister have anything to say to these families waiting in limbo? This punitive, discriminatory piece of legislation is a slap in the face to the carers, cleaners, drivers and shop assistants who have risked their lives on the frontline to keep this country running throughout the pandemic, and who Members here have applauded every week. The scale of the Government’s hypocrisy is breathtaking—clapping for carers one day and downgrading their status in law the next. This Bill would class many vital jobs as low skilled and prevent people from getting a new work visa or extension. That would include care workers—people like my colleagues with whom I worked before becoming an MP and during the pandemic. The work may be low paid and badly undervalued by those in power, but it is not low skilled.”
“Under such a system of employer sponsorship, workers are heavily restricted in their access to public funds, which puts many at risk of destitution. They are also less likely to join their colleagues in employment struggles for better terms and conditions. Migrants have been blamed for low wages, but it is not them who drive down employment standards—it is exploitative bosses who do, and it is this Government who allow them to do that. We have to make it clear that nobody’s rights should be linked to an employer. A person’s worth is not determined by their economic value. Instead of removing EU citizens’ rights, the Government should have focused on making up for the injustices that they have inflicted on the Windrush generation and other migrant communities. The Windrush compensation scheme is clearly not working.”
“I will not be taking any interventions; I need to make progress. The hostile environment, from right-to-rent checks to the immigration health surcharge, is built on the premise that migrants should be discouraged from coming to the UK. Not satisfied with the disaster of the Windrush scandal, the Government seem determined to press ahead with this unjust, discriminatory and poorly designed piece of legislation. The Home Secretary has yet to set out the details of what will come in place of freedom of movement. This Bill does not do that. Instead, it introduces multiple Henry VIII powers, which remove much-needed scrutiny from our future immigration system. I am afraid that the benefits of a points-based immigration system are a myth.”
“It was in that context that the Secretary of State overruled his advisers to reduce the amount of affordable housing required in the Westferry development. Let us take this slowly, because this point cannot be laboured enough. With an increase in street homelessness of more than 250% since 2010—”
“Zoe McKendree, 33, told the BBC that she spends more than a third of her pay on rent for her shared flat. She dreams of having the keys to a home of her own, but for her and most people of her generation, let alone my generation, that remains a distant prospect. Instead, Zoe has to contend with what she describes as “callous” landlords and escalating costs. She has also experienced numerous no-fault evictions, where private landlords evict tenants at short notice without good reason. This country is deep in a housing crisis of the Government’s own making. Not only are people spending more than a third of their income on rent, but the number of rough sleepers in England has, shockingly—shamefully —increased by more than 250% since the Conservative party was elected in 2010.”
“Transparency International defines corruption as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.” It has said of corruption in the UK: “Although corruption is not endemic in the UK, it is correct to say that in some areas of UK society and institutions, corruption is a much greater problem than recognised and that there is an inadequate response”—”
“The Secretary of State is shaking his head, but those are the facts. With that increase, and with a generation of people trapped in precarious and poorly regulated rented housing, we have a Secretary of State in charge of housing fighting to reduce the number of affordable housing units in a development. How on earth do the Government justify that move? It seems baffling to me, considering that fact alone, that the Secretary of State should be deemed fit to represent the wider public interest as part of his brief. Reducing the ratio of affordable dwellings from one in three to one in five saved billionaire developer and Tory donor Richard Desmond another £40 million by enabling him to sell those units on the premium property market instead.”
“People of the Windrush generation were deported as a result of the Government’s hostile environment policies, including the healthcare surcharge, no recourse to public funds, the illegal working offence, immigration detention and the right to rent checks, which have been found to cause racial discrimination. The Home Secretary has not answered the question yet: why are those policies still in place, and when will they be abolished?”
“The Conservative party is the party of the food bank and zero-hour contracts. The Living Wage Foundation calculates the real living wage—not the Government’s made up living wage—based on what people need to get by. It is set at £9.30 per hour outside London and that means that anyone paid below that is on a poverty wage.”
“The fact that 1.3 million children are routinely receiving free school meals shows that something is deeply wrong. We are a wealthy country, but that wealth is not fairly distributed; the wealthiest 10% in our country have about 45% of the wealth. That inequality is only increasing; wages for the majority have been stagnant for the past decade, employment is increasingly insecure and precarious, and we have a standard-of-living slide, all while the rich get richer. Even though they may be fed this summer, we will still have approximately one third of children living in poverty. The Government typically respond to this by saying that the best route out of poverty is through work, but that is simply a meaningless platitude in view of the fact that most children who live in poverty have at least one parent in work.”
“These pupils have been temporarily eligible for free school meals during the pandemic; will the Minister commit to ensuring that that continues, not just this summer, but as a permanent change in policy? It is telling that the Education Secretary should imply that children need access to nutritious, healthy meals only when they are at school. If it is wrong for children to go hungry, it is always wrong for children to go hungry, not just during a global pandemic and not only while they are at school. Despite the very welcome U-turn, this Government are by no means let off the hook for their shameful and damning record on child poverty and hunger. In the sixth richest country in the world, there is no excuse for letting a single child go to bed hungry.”
“The idea that children should not go hungry is one that most people would consider an issue of basic morality. I am glad that the Government have now conceded that the free school meals scheme should be extended to cover the summer, but given that the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Vicky Ford), was still arguing against this only a few hours ago, it is clear that this is not a moral change of heart, but a result of incredible pressure from campaigners such as Marcus Rashford and the Opposition. I would like to ask the Minister about one aspect of the policy. There are many children in this country who have committed no crime but the crime of being migrants —an accident of geography—and who therefore have no recourse to public funds.”
“We will try again. Does the Home Secretary agree that the Government should remove statues of British figures involved in the slave trade? Further, does she agree that the lives of black people who have died following contact with police, such as Sarah Reed and Rashan Charles, are worth more than any statue?”
“We should return immediately to hybrid proceedings and remote voting to enable Parliament to work safely and effectively during the pandemic and make improvements from there, not be forced backwards in this way.”
“This is particularly relevant to people who are neurodivergent, disabled or with caring responsibilities. We need to move forward, not ditch our learning from this pandemic, so that we can be a more effective Parliament—a more inclusive Parliament leading by example on better working practices. The Electoral Reform Society has said that Westminster should not return to “business as usual” after the outbreak without considering whether innovations adopted during the crisis should be kept. Darren Hughes, director of the Electoral Reform Society, is on record as saying: “To cut down remote voting just as it’s bearing fruit would be reckless and wrong. We should be learning from how parliament has adapted during this crisis”.”
“When the advice to the country was, “Continue working from home if at all possible,” this Government decided that MPs should all return to this place for what we might call a mass gathering. It should not have needed a pandemic to drag this place into modern-day working practices, but thanks to your efforts, Mr Deputy Speaker, and those of the Speaker, as well as the efforts from colleagues here and the hard work of staff in Parliament, we adapted quickly to the hybrid system and we managed well. Yet now the Government have taken backward steps, simply ditching the online system, stamping all over this fledgling innovative approach. Colleagues here have rapidly learned new working practices, setting a positive example about the value of flexible working.”
“Our relationship with the European Union will have significant economic effects on our country. The Minister will have done modelling of the impacts; how many people in the country will be pushed into poverty as a result of us leaving the European Union?”
“My question is straightforward. Can the Minister tell me—no generalities, no kicking the can down the road—on what specific date all care workers can expect to receive PPE?”
“Some members of this Bill Committee may recall that the Labour DEFRA team tabled an amendment banning foie gras imports during the Committee stage of the Agriculture Bill in 2018. It was extremely disappointing and embarrassing that the then Government chose not to accept that reasonable and common-sense amendment. I sincerely hope that they will not choose to repeat the mistake today in voting against new clause 10. We know that the Secretary of State has spoken favourably of a ban. He is on record saying: “When we leave the European Union, we do indeed have an opportunity to look at restrictions on sales”. —[ Official Report , 13 June 2018; Vol. 642, c. 1052.] That opportunity is today, and the time is now.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause would ban the import of foie gras in the UK. As I am sure many here will be aware, foie gras is a product made from the livers of ducks or geese that have been repeatedly force-fed, by having a metal tube inserted down their throats several times a day, when they are just 12 weeks old. It is effectively produced by rendering the animal diseased. While the production of this so-called delicacy has been banned in Britain since 2000, the fact that imports to the UK are allowed is an effective green light to the continued suffering and mistreatment of these animals. Shockingly, the UK imports around 200 tonnes of foie gras each year from mainland Europe. Today we have an opportunity to put a stop to that once and for all.”
“I must say I am disappointed in the Minister’s response. What she says on animal welfare is at odds with what is in the Bill. Therefore, I will move this new clause to a vote. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.”