Antonia Bance
MP for Tipton and Wednesbury · Labour · United Kingdom
“We all support greater production here in the UK, but the details of these tariffs need more work. Black Country MPs, such as me and my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes), have heard huge worries from our downstream industries, including stockholders such as Amari, fabricators such as Angle Ring, and trade associatio…”
“T4. We now know what was going on in the economy before the attack on Iran. Growth was up. Unemployment was down. Borrowing was lower than forecast. The Chancellor took the right decisions and it was working. Does my right hon.”
“I thank my hon. Friend and fellow member of the Business and Trade Committee for giving way. We have sat in a number of hearings where different industries have expressed to us the competitive disadvantage that they experience because people in the industry use the gig economy or platform work to avoid responsibilities.”
“I thank the Secretary of State for this announcement, which will make a big difference to so many young people in our area of the Black Country who are looking for work or training but unable to find the opportunities they need.”
“Given the global situation, what discussions has the Chancellor had with Cabinet colleagues on helping to keep industrial energy costs manageable? Will she work with colleagues to bring in the British industrial competitiveness scheme, which would cut manufacturing energy costs by 25%, as soon as possible?”
“As a manufacturing MP and manufacturing champion from the heart of the industrial revolution—indeed, where it started—I stand here to champion our industrial strategy, and particularly the work that the Department has done, as evidenced in these estimates, to support our automotive industry: the £2.5 billion to support DRIVE35 and the tra…”
The complete record
Every one of 239 lines we hold for Antonia Bance, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 5.
“Hundreds of thousands of them got jobs through the future jobs fund. It was particularly effective for the hardest-to-help young people, and in tough labour markets, in places like the one that I represent, but it was canned, basically on day one, by a Conservative Chancellor. I am so glad that our Work and Pensions Secretary is building on the legacy of the future jobs fund to help a new generation of young people.”
“People familiar with the constituency I represent will not be surprised to hear that they are particularly high in my corner of the Black Country. This is in no small part due to the failures of the Conservatives in government, not least during the pandemic, when they kept the schools closed but allowed pubs to open. Opposition Members keep calling on us to engage in further welfare reform to cut the welfare bill. It is interesting to me that when we do so—when we announce a clear, costed, proven, evidence-based plan to get young people back into work, as we did this weekend—they do not like it. It feels like history repeating itself. I remember the future jobs fund from 15 or 16 years ago, and the way it gave hope to a generation of young people kicked out of work as a result of a global financial crisis, through no fault of their own.”
“I thank the hon. Member for his kind words, and for his intervention. It is absolutely clear that alongside investment in public services, there is investment in infrastructure, in house building, and in making sure that this is a good country in which to grow and scale a business. I am glad of those things. I am also glad that we took action to ensure that the poorest families are able to feed all of their children. The way to make the high street thrive is for people to have more money to spend. Let me repeat the statistic mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger). There are more people aged between 18 and 24 in work this year than there were a year ago, but NEET numbers are still too high.”
“Earlier this week, I asked colleagues in the trade union movement to run the numbers, based on Government statistics, on how many workers will benefit from the reduction of the waiting period for protection from unfair dismissal from two years to six months: 6.3 million workers will benefit from that—from protection against being unfairly dismissed, without due process, for reasons that are not good enough—and 36% of hospitality workers will benefit as well. I am so very glad that we are making rules that will benefit disproportionately the workers most likely to be exploited at work.”
“It is not clear to me how that is a credible plan, when the annual welfare bill went up by £114 billion on their watch. Of course, Members would not expect me to speak in a debate like this without talking about my pride in our Employment Rights Bill and our plan to make work pay. I am proud beyond words to speak for hospitality workers and for seasonal workers who will benefit from that Bill.”
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, as I have done since the first time we worked together, more than 20 years ago. It is interesting to hear the advocacy for welfare reform. Today we have heard a lot about the difficulties with business rates, and I will not rehearse the arguments—they have been well made by my friends on the Front Bench—about the action that this Government are taking on business rates to help the hospitality and retail sectors, but I will make this point. We have heard repeatedly from Opposition Members that they would like to abolish business rates for retail and hospitality, yet they do not have a plan to do that. To pay for it, they will somehow find £47 billion worth of “savings”. The majority of that will come through indiscriminate cutting of the welfare budget.”
“In conclusion, I often say that my goal is for people in my constituency to be able to take the family out for a curry on Friday night and not worry about the cost. I want that for all workers, including the hospitality workers who are serving and cooking that curry, and the seasonal workers who make it such a pleasure to be on the beach at Blackpool or down in Brighton, having that curry. That is why we need a Government focused on growth, new rights for every worker in the Employment Rights Bill, and a higher national minimum wage.”
“I agree with my hon. Friend. Employers may continue to dismiss, as long as they do so for fair reasons and following a fair process, and good employers already do that. My favourite measures in the Employment Rights Bill—this could be a very long speech, but I will bring it to a close— [Interruption.] I will! I will just say this: I am so proud of the ban on zero-hours contracts, and I suggest to my hon. Friends on the Government Front Bench that we should have a nice short reference period for that when the consultation begins. I am so proud of the plans on sick pay, and on fire and rehire. I am so proud of our enhanced parental leave, the fair pay agreement and the school support staff negotiating body.”
“One of the things I am most proud of—having stood on doorstep after doorstep in Tipton, Wednesbury and Coseley at the general election, hearing people tell the dreadful stories of how long they and their relatives had been waiting for hospital treatment—is the 45% fall in people waiting more than a year for their operation in the Black Country, in our hospital trusts. I am glad the Chancellor made the decisions she did in the last Budget that have enabled that.”
“Last week I went to Alucast in Wednesbury, one of our brilliant foundries. I have also been to Newby Foundries. Both told me of their relief that the landfill tax will not impose significant additional costs on them. I wonder whether the Chancellor would like to set out the action she is taking to support our brilliant manufacturing and automotive industries at this Budget.”
“I thank my right hon. Friend for her leadership on the two-child limit, and for always carrying the kids who did not eat last night in her heart. Last week, I was at Sacred Heart school in Tipton in my constituency, where the school council and the teaching staff spoke to me about how children living in temporary accommodation on the Hagley Road in Birmingham have to get two or more buses and trains to school every morning. Their parents get them there by hook or by crook, but they are often late, which has an impact on their lives. Can the Secretary of State tell us a little more about what she will do to ensure that our youngest children, in particular, are out of bed-and-breakfast accommodation as soon as possible?”
“The hon. Member seems to be under the misapprehension that the lifting of the cap was not agreed as part of the negotiation on the compromise. It was. Perhaps she would like to revise her remarks.”
“Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), that the right to request worked so well for flexible working that flexible working does not work—we are having to fix it with this Bill—and yet she proposes to bring in an unworkable right to request, instead of a guaranteed right to a decent hours contract. I will take no lectures from the Greens—what a shame that they are not here—who are letting their peers vote whichever way they want on something as important as this. As for Reform UK, they pretend to be the representatives of working-class people, but vote against their interests at every turn. I say to those in the other place: it is time to pass this Bill to make work pay and to deliver the rights that were promised in our manifesto and voted for—the rights that millions have waited far too long to see.”
“Our opinions have not changed, and our opinions on the principle have not changed. What is needed now is practicality to ensure that the Bill moves forward—and as we take it forward, Members should be sure to notice who opposes it. I would expect nothing less of the Tories. I would expect the Lib Dems to remember their total opposition to the Trade Union Act 2016, including their opposition to changes in the political fund rules and their opposition—at that time, but apparently no longer—to the undemocratic ballot thresholds that create a higher bar for trade unions than for anyone else in society. I would gently remind their spokesperson, the hon.”
“To be clear, unions negotiated this deal with the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden), and it has my support. Today I will not let the best be the enemy of the good. Cutting the qualifying period for unfair dismissal from two years to six months will benefit 6.35 million workers—disproportionately, young workers, ethnic minority workers, and an astonishing 36% of hospitality workers. New figures based on Government data have been produced today to tell us about the impact that the Bill is going to have. Removing the cap on unfair dismissal compensation means that workers will be able to get what they deserve, and bad bosses cannot price in the cost of ignoring the law. I was also glad to hear my hon. Friend’s clarity about the timing.”
“I wish to draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, my membership of Unite, and the kind support of ASLEF and the GMB for my election campaign. This Employment Rights Bill is our promise to working people on its way to being fulfilled, thanks in no small part to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) and my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders). I am glad to see that Ministers have tabled amendments that reflect the constructive negotiations between themselves, unions—including my former employers at the TUC—and business associations, because that is how we roll in the labour movement. We get round a table, we talk, we come to a deal and we move forward. That is the right way to do things when people do not agree.”
“Every child deserves a fair start in life.” This is what a Labour Government do. Not the shame and powerlessness of nine-year-old Cameron telling us that he tries not to eat too much, but, with Labour in government, lower energy bills, higher wages, growth everywhere—not just in London—and lower child poverty. This is a Labour Budget for all our families.”
“Ending the two-child limit at a stroke helps 5,540 children in Tipton, Wednesbury and Coseley and 1.6 million nationally—one in every nine of our kids. Most families who are helped—six in 10—are in work, and loads of them—four in 10—have a disabled member. None of them deserve poverty. So to the mums with three or more kids who are using universal credit to top up low wages and high rents, I say this: “I know how hard you work, and how tough it is out there. I know you love your kids fiercely. This is for you.” To the parties opposite, I say, “Don’t talk to me about how families should plan. You have never met a better planner than a single mum in Friar Park making the money stretch.” To my constituents who are working hard to make ends meet, not always able to afford everything they want, I say this: “I get it, but I will not apologise.”
“If you get ill or lose your job, if—heaven forbid—your partner dies, if your husband beats you up and you have to grab your kids and run, the safety net of our welfare state will once again catch you and all your kids. No child is responsible for the actions of their parents. The happy event of a little one being born should not tip a family into poverty, and whether a six-year-old eats tonight should not depend on how many sisters and brothers she has. In 2019, many of us watched a “Dispatches” documentary called “Britain’s Breadline Kids” and heard Cameron, then aged nine, say “We try not to eat too much in a day”. It shamed us all. We raged at our lack of power to change it, but now we can, and we will.”
“In this country, our deal is this: if you do the right thing and work, bring your kids up well and follow the rules, the country will help you in return. In our tradition, we believe in a strong state that helps people to lift their heads from daily struggle and gives everyone the freedom to set their own path. For so many, that means the simple aspiration of having children and building a family, which is why in this Budget we are funding more childcare, free breakfast clubs and free school meals. It is why we will build 1.5 million new homes, end no-fault eviction and ban zero-hours contracts. With this Budget, we add one more source of security for working-class families.”
“I am so sorry that the shadow Health Secretary is no longer in his place. After his astonishing speech, I wanted to invite him to the Black Country, where waiting lists of more than a year are down by 45%. I think that the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison) managed somehow to compare a speech he disagreed with to Hillsborough; that is not worthy of him, and I hope he will withdraw it. This is a Budget to cut the cost of living. It is a Budget to make work pay, raising the national minimum wage and giving 2.7 million workers a pay rise. Work brings dignity, and everyone who can should work, but work alone is not always enough to beat the wolves of hunger, cold and want.”
“It is very worrying to hear about the repeated attempts to access the statement before it was given, and I wonder why Conservative Members are not a little more concerned, given that the same situation may have affected them. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if a Government left themselves with only £4 billion of headroom, they would be taking unacceptable risks with the UK’s fiscal stability?”
“Will the hon. Member address this point that in the case of the six in 10 children who are in families affected by the two-child benefit limit, those families have jobs? Will he address the situation of my constituent who lost her husband? She was working, he was working and they had three kids together. They were working and still they were affected by the two-child benefit limit. It is facile in the extreme to talk about just getting a job as the route out of poverty—it is not.”
“The hon. Member is not being very clear. Does he like the pre-2016 trade union regime, which is the one this Bill takes us back to, or does he like the post-2016 trade union regime, which is the one he seems to be advocating except when he talks about the 30 years of settled consensus? Which is it, because it cannot be both?”
“Does the hon. Member believe that, in the first six months of employment, it is appropriate for people to be dismissed for unfair reasons and without a fair process?”
“Of course, anyone who is familiar with how the trade union movement works knows that no union would call members out on strike if they are not up for it. With all due thanks and respect to the other place, we will still repeal the Trade Union Act 2016 in full, with no concessions. This Bill is the first step in delivering the new deal for working people—our promise to the working people of this country. This is the change that working people voted for. The Government will not give in to unelected Tory and Lib Dem Lords siding with bad bosses to weaken workers’ rights—not now, not today, not ever.”
“I also oppose Lords amendment 62, on keeping the unnecessary and unneeded ballot thresholds, which are designed to stop workers having a voice. The Tory and Lib Dem Lords want to reinstate the 50% turnout threshold that was introduced by the draconian Trade Union Act 2016. I remind Members from the Liberal Democrat party that they opposed that Act in 2016, including the ballot thresholds, and I wonder why they have now reversed their position. Ballot thresholds weaken unions and stall negotiations. Before 2016, ballots triggered talks and resolved disputes early. Now the thresholds delay dialogue and make resolution harder. No other organisations face turnout thresholds; this just singles out unions.”
“The Lords want to keep the opt-in system, but it is abundantly clear that this is a deliberate attack on the political voice of working people. All this Bill does is restore the long-standing opt-out system that has lasted since 1946. Union members will still have robust rights, and they can opt out easily. Unions are tightly regulated—no other membership organisation has faced these rules. Unions’ political spending is transparent and accountable, with annual returns to the certification officer and the Electoral Commission regulating donations and campaigning. Of course, these political funds support wider campaigning, not just party donations, although I am proud to say that they support party donations too.”
“I wish to draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, my proud 23 years in Unite, and the generous support from the millions of ordinary members of the GMB and ASLEF in paying into their political funds to put representatives of the working class here in Parliament. I am here to deliver a simple but firm message: there will be no concessions on this Bill—not one. Opposition parties in the House of Lords are trying to water down the rights that working people voted for, but we will stand firm. The new deal for working people was a Labour manifesto commitment, and it will be delivered in full. I want to talk about two sets of amendments, starting with Lords amendments 61 and 72, on political funds.”
“One of my constituents lost her husband after they had made a decision to have three children together, as working taxpayers. Her husband had died, and she needed the help for which she had contributed: was that a lifestyle choice?”
“It is always good to follow another Member for the Black Country. I was recently very pleased to meet with Babcock International, which is based in Walsall, just over the M6 from my constituency, where it makes armoured cars. Can the Secretary of State comment on future opportunities for defence manufacturing in the Black Country and the wider west midlands?”
“The Conservatives left one in 10 workers in insecure employment, including the better part of a million on zero-hours contracts. The Conservatives’ cuts to social security pushed more families into poverty, which has resulted in 50% of children in my constituency living below the poverty line. That is every second kid—every second door when I walk around the estates that I have the honour to represent. Some 117,000 people are now living in temporary accommodation because of the money the Conservatives took out of the affordable housing building fund that today they seem so very pleased to speak in favour of.”
“It left nine in 10 of our schools in urgent need of repair, with more than 230 schools with Swiss cheese for roofs, including reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete in the roof of Wood Green school in my constituency. Those pupils deserve so much better; they deserve a decent place to learn. We will make that happen—the Conservatives did not. When the pandemic struck, our public services were critically understaffed and had received critical under-investment. The result, thanks to the Conservatives’ austerity and cuts, was more than 170,000 excess deaths, putting the UK among the worst in the developed world. In that period, our precious public sector workers who give their all—nurses, teachers, carers—had their pay frozen or capped for years, leaving the average nurse more than £4,000 worse off than in 2010.”
“Yes, it is time for the greatest hits of austerity—the 14 years in which the Conservatives talked and did this country down, when day-to-day spending on public services fell by nearly 17%, stripping away nearly £46 billion every year from the services our residents rely on. Members should remember that figure as I talk about austerity, because the Conservatives would fund the tax cut we are talking about today with £47 billion—a larger number than that figure from the austerity years. Look at the back-of-a-fag-packet plans that they have to make it add up. Let us remember what austerity did to our country. It left our NHS with a £10 billion repairs backlog.”
“Here we go again, Madam Deputy Speaker—always the promise of tax cuts to come, never the proper plans to ensure it is affordable. This motion tells us everything we need to know about the modern Conservative party; once again, its first recourse is to reach for the austerity button instead of making a serious plan to invest, grow the economy and strengthen our public services. Reckless with the public finances and reckless with our public services, the Conservatives are not a serious party. I was going to make this point specifically for the right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart), but I see that he is not in his place, so everyone else can enjoy it instead.”
“] Yes, they are my friends. I was proud to represent millions of working people. Conservative Members speak about those working people with disdain, but it was an honour to represent them in their workplace and negotiate for better wages on their behalf. Good Conservatives in the past used to understand social partnership and the importance of responsibility and working with workers and bosses to get the best outcome; it is a shame those lessons have been forgotten, with the baying calls of the mob at the mention of trade unions. My friends at the TUC have worked out that if wages had risen in the past decade by the amount by which they rose between 1997 and 2010, the average worker in my constituency would be £93 a week better off—that is nearly five grand a year more in people’s pockets.”
“I am speaking today about the other part of the motion before us—the part about the unspecified cuts that would pay for the tax cut—and the implications of that. As the hon. Gentleman would expect of a responsible member of my party, I am not going to speculate with plans about how we fund things for which there is no plan. Going back to the record of austerity—remembering that austerity cost and took out of our economy less than the Conservatives propose taking out in their motion today—it left the bottom fifth of households £517 poorer, while the top fifth gained £174. Austerity did not just deepen inequality; it entrenched it. It led to the longest pay squeeze in 200 years, with growth anaemic, productivity absolutely flatlined and public investment slashed. My friends at the TUC have worked out— [ Interruption.”
“Now compare that to our Labour Government, who are steadily and slowly delivering the change that this country needs. We are creating 5 million extra NHS appointments, and the number of people in my area waiting more than a year for the operation that they need is down 45%. Thanks to the investment from our Heath Secretary, crack teams are going into Dudley, Wolverhampton and Sandwell NHS trusts. We secured three major trade deals in the first 10 months of our Government, and wages went up by more than they did in the first 10 years of the Conservative Government. We are putting in pride in place funding for communities that are hit the hardest, such as Friar Park in my constituency, and £39 billion of affordable housing funding is going to fund new social and affordable homes—the largest amount in a generation.”
“To be clear, the point that I am making is about the unspecified cuts referenced in the motion. I am talking about the implications from the last time the Conservatives made cuts of that magnitude. While it may be the case that getting rid of stamp duty would save some money for people in my constituency, where there is an average house price of £190,000, it would by no means have the impact that it would for people in richer constituencies in other parts of the country. The cuts that the Conservatives intend to make to pay for it would, however, hit people in my ends. Despite all the pain of those years of austerity, it failed to reduce public debt in any meaningful way. That is why our public services were on their knees and we face a mountain of debt that has built up over 14 long years.”
“One of the key achievements in the first 15 months of this Labour Government has been that we are starting to fix some of the mess from the dreadful agreement that the Conservatives made with the European Union, which undermined this country. We are filling some of the holes, and making it easier to do trade with the European Union and sell brilliant British products abroad. I would have thought that would be something that the Conservatives would welcome. In summation, we choose national renewal—a Britain built for everyone. We choose a fair economy that rewards working people, invests in our public services, restores dignity to work and rebuilds this brilliant country for every single one of our kids.”
“Last week, I went to the toddler group at Open Heaven church in Friar Park. The mums there told me there is nothing for young people to do in Friar Park—no playground, no youth club. Does the Minister agree with me that the £20 million is going to make the most massive difference to Friar Park, especially given that it is local people, like those mums, who will decide how it is spent?”
“If we do not oppose those Lords amendments, such unlawful practices will continue unchecked, and renters will continue to face homelessness as a result.”
“Discrimination is notoriously hard to prove, and we all know that early interactions between a renter and a prospective landlord are often not in writing, so proving beyond reasonable doubt that a prospective renter was prevented from letting a property because they might be a benefits claimant or have kids would be extremely challenging; it is the same for proving bidding wars. Councils already struggle to pursue civil penalty cases because of the staff time and resource involved in gathering evidence to support those cases. Introducing that new, higher bar of evidence for already challenging cases would make them almost unenforceable. It would also be out of line with other legislation, such as the Equality Act 2010, which require only the civil standard of proof.”
“Once again, I stand here proud to speak in favour of this groundbreaking legislation that finally brings some balance back between the landlord’s right to profit from an asset and the renter’s right to a home. I oppose in particular Lords amendments 26, 27 and 18 proposed by the landlord lobby in the other place. Amendments 26 and 27 would increase the evidence bar for all civil penalty offences to the criminal standard of proof—beyond reasonable doubt rather than on the balance of probabilities. That would gut the ban on discrimination against housing benefit recipients, the ban on refusing to let to families and the ban on bidding wars. Those measures would be almost unenforceable if the amendment stood.”
“I am so glad to see the extension of the holiday activities and food programme. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to the work of Jo Haydon and all the staff and volunteers at the 4 Community Trust in Hateley Heath—one of the areas of highest child poverty in my constituency—and their delivery of the HAF programme this year?”
“They may get a text message when they are stood at the bus stop on the way to their shift saying, “Sorry mate, we don’t need you today. Don’t come in.” We will ban those contracts. My last point is on sick pay. Some 279,000 workers in the hospitality sector earn below the lower earnings limit, and we will make sure they are entitled to sick pay. This is Labour delivering for workers. The Tories and the Lib Dems, along with their mates in Reform, have ganged up together in the House of Lords to try to gut the Employment Rights Bill, but we will not have it. I do not want the hospitality workers serving me a curry on Friday night—”
“The extension of day one rights is a policy tailor-made for the hospitality sector; as 50% of all hospitality workers do not have two years’ service, they can be hired and fired at will, as if we were America. That is not what we want in our economy. Why should it be possible for someone who has worked faithfully for an employer for a year and 11 months to lose their job overnight, with no process and no reason, meaning they cannot pay the rent next month? We will stop that. Ditto zero-hours contracts, on which 18% of hospitality workers are employed—the highest of any sector. Let us remind ourselves of the reality of that. Workers on zero-hours contracts cannot set things up because they do not know when they will be working.”
“If Conservative Members were to read the report of the last session of the Low Pay Commission, they would find that it visited hospitality businesses in the city of Glasgow, speaking both to workers and to the people running those businesses. It is one of the very best, most consensual ways of forming Government policy, and I am disappointed in the attack on it, especially as it is at present chaired by a Conservative peer. I stand here today, as I always do, representing workers. Many hospitality workers are represented by my union, Unite. I am proud of the record of our Government, for far from being a Bill that attacks the hospitality sector, the Employment Rights Bill is written with the hospitality sector in mind.”
“In the spirit of the Minister’s invitation, I invite any Member to come to one of our brilliant Black Country Desi pubs, or to come and eat orange chips with me next to the canal. Everyone in this Chamber wants high and rising wages, and for their constituents to feel that they can just take the family out for a curry on a Friday night. That is why I was so disappointed to see in the wording of the motion before us today an attack on the Low Pay Commission—a piece of settled government machinery that has served Governments of all parties well. The commission is tripartite, representing business, unions and academics; it consults business closely, visits employers and talks to both managers and workers.”
“Over the years, those industries have declined, but still the Black Country’s future is bright. It is still one of the UK’s most industrialised areas, thanks to iron foundries, and our haulage, automotive and metals industries. As we celebrate our heritage, we must remember the pivotal role that working people played in the creation of the modern Black Country.”