Alex McIntyre
MP for Gloucester · Labour · United Kingdom
“Last week I signed a letter to the Foreign Secretary, along with 140 colleagues, asking the Government to take further action in response to settler violence and the rhetoric used by two far-right Israeli Government Ministers.”
“I welcome the report and my hon. Friend’s commitment to cross-departmental working, but I want to raise one area that his Department could put its weight behind.”
“The River Severn holds incredible potential for tidal energy, with the Severn Estuary Commission finding that it has the potential to generate up to 7% of the UK’s electricity. Will my right hon.”
“May I associate myself with the remarks of the Secretary of State about Romania? Last week I visited Romania through the armed forces parliamentary scheme, and met armed forces personnel who are part of the NATO air policing mission.”
“I hear time and again from constituents who are fed up with having to explain their story several times to different medical practitioners. Keeping records that do not speak to each other just does not make sense in the digital world in which we now live. It is inconvenient, frustrating and, most of all, it threatens patient safety.”
“That is just not acceptable, and it highlights the entrenched health inequalities found in constituencies like mine up and down the country. Deprivation, poverty and a lack of adequate healthcare are harming life chances in every part of our United Kingdom.”
The complete record
Every one of 319 lines we hold for Alex McIntyre, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“Q2. I am delighted that Calton and Grange primary schools in my city of Gloucester will be among the first 750 schools to get free breakfast clubs, and I am pleased that this Government are already delivering on their manifesto promises in less than a year. So will the Prime Minister agree with me that, by helping working parents with childcare and delivering the best start to the day for every single child, we are delivering opportunity for the next generation?”
“I understand that there are no quick fixes and there is no magic wand that can undo 14 years of neglect, but I welcome the Government’s £1 billion uplift in SEND funding and the £740 million to create new specialist places in mainstream schools, as well as the commitment to train 400 new educational psychologists and retain these professionals. Will the Minister outline the steps the Government are taking to improve the EHCP process so that families feel supported through it? These measures will ensure that we do not repeat the failures of the last Government. We will be the voice of change, breaking down the barriers to give SEND children better support. These children face so many hurdles in their lives, and it is time we ensured that they have a brighter future and are supported.”
“That is one of the biggest challenges facing parents in my area: a system that denies their child’s needs and puts the presumption on saying no, rather than asking how it can best support children. The repercussions are staggering. In the past decade, decision times on EHCPs increased by 140%, with two in five taking more than six months to process. In Gloucester, only 35% of EHCP decisions were issued within the 20-week target. That is a disgrace, and it is yet again up to the Labour Government to fix the Tory mess.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk Coastal (Jenny Riddell-Carpenter) for securing this important debate. I have been contacted time and again by parents in Gloucester who are desperate for support for their children. They have been failed by the system and their children have been left to suffer as a result. The message from parents is clear: they want more support, a reduction in the waiting times for EHCPs, and a system where every plan is processed quickly, fairly and effectively. It is clear that the last Government failed to invest, failed to plan and failed an entire generation of our children and their parents. They created a postcode lottery whereby parents are forced to battle the system rather than being supported by it.”
“I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for having the confidence and courage to accept interventions, unlike some hon. Members. Does she agree that the shadow Minister’s comments showed how out of touch the Conservative party is? Parents have been in tears in my surgeries due to the system that the Conservatives left behind.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her answer, and for all the work she has done over many years to champion victims and survivors of domestic abuse. As she will know, one of the biggest challenges facing survivors and victims in Gloucester is the financial implications of fleeing that abuse. Will she agree to meet me to discuss my 10-minute rule Bill, the Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Bill, which would introduce safe leave for victims of domestic abuse and violence?”
“Conservative-led Gloucestershire county council has a dreadful record. The Care Quality Commission says that adult social services require improvement, children’s services are described as catastrophic, the fire service is in special measures, the health service is failing, local authority schools are crumbling, the SEND system is broken, and do not get me started on the potholes. No wonder the Conservatives on the county council wanted our elections cancelled this May. Will the Deputy Prime Minister agree to meet me and local leaders in Gloucester to ensure that we get the best deal for Gloucester residents from local government reorganisation and devolution?”
“I hope that in Gloucestershire we will take advantage of the devolution of adult skills funding, empowering local leaders to take charge of skills development in our area. Importantly, we will reform the apprenticeship levy, which has proven ineffective. In its place, the Government will introduce a flexible growth and skills levy, creating a fairer system that works for employers and learners in Gloucester.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) for securing this important debate. Apprenticeships matter. They matter because they break down the barriers to opportunity, giving residents in cities like Gloucester the skills that they need to succeed in life. This Government are committed to creating a fairer, more inclusive system that equips individuals with not only the skills that they need today, but the skills that we will all need in future. We are introducing a youth guarantee, transforming further education colleges and fostering collaboration between businesses, training providers and Government to build a highly skilled workforce ready to support Labour’s industrial strategy.”
“I will therefore be grateful if the Minister sets out the steps that the Government are taking to support FE colleges and work placements. Apprenticeships are not just a pathway to employment. They are a key driver of opportunity for future generations. They provide people with the chance to gain valuable skills, earn while they learn and build fulfilling careers. By supporting people to gain skills in sectors such as technology, science, engineering, health and education, we are building a skilled workforce that will benefit individuals, businesses and the economy. The steps that this Government are taking will leave a lasting legacy of opportunity, ensuring a prosperous future and a workforce ready for the challenges ahead. This will lay the foundations for a stronger Britain, one in which the future is bright and Gloucester thrives.”
“I agree entirely. SMEs are the backbone of our business community. I recently met the Federation of Small Businesses in the south-west to discuss the opportunities in small and medium-sized businesses in Gloucester and across the region. As my hon. Friend says, apprenticeships are so important to those businesses, as is ensuring that the new levy is flexible so everyone can take part and every person in our country can benefit from the opportunities. I recently met the principal of Gloucestershire College to discuss the opportunities and the vital role of FE colleges in helping young people to develop the skills that they need for the future, but challenges remain. Our higher and further education system is under significant strain. Many young people leave school without the skills or preparation that they need for the future.”
“Parents of SEND children in Gloucester will welcome today’s statement and the words of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on SEND and inclusion in our schools. Will the Minister confirm that the measures set out by this Labour Government will drive up standards for all children in Gloucester, and will she meet me and parents in my city, who have for years battled the broken system left behind by the previous Conservative Government?”
“Members of this House develop a relatively thick skin in this job but imagine the impact of that on a teenager. I think back to my teenage days, and whether I was mentally equipped to be able to deal with cases of bullying. I am just about young enough to remember when Facebook came in—I was a teenager when Facebook started—and back then it was a very different place. Nowadays, we see, frankly, a cesspit of online content and I do not think that I would have had the mental capacity, during my teenage years, to deal with that level of abuse.”
“While the Online Safety Act 2023 was a long-awaited start to protecting children online, we must go further and I was pleased to hear my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology say that he is “open-minded” about introducing new legislation. I encourage him to consider introducing Jools’ law. My remarks will not particularly focus on online content, although my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) outlined some of the dangerous and horrific online content to which children and young people are exposed. Members of this House do not need to be reminded of the horrific content available online. Not long after being elected, I found that pictures of myself and my baby had been posted with a threatening message, anonymously, as part of an online “spotted” page.”
“I know that parents are increasingly worried about their children’s use of social media across the country and in my constituency of Gloucester. According to the Children’s Commissioner, two thirds of parents are concerned about the content that their children can access online, and the impact that it is having on their children’s mental health. Those concerns are felt by not only parents but children themselves. Research shows that nearly three quarters of teenagers have encountered potential harms online and three in five secondary-school age children have been contacted online in ways that have made them feel uncomfortable. As social media becomes increasingly embedded in our children’s lives, it is clear that urgent action is needed.”
“It is unbelievably courageous to turn away from the abyss of pain and grief, and to turn that into a campaign for good. It is, frankly, inspirational to many Members in this House and I thank the 1,711 Gloucester constituents who signed the petition. As a relatively new parent, I now know what it is like to really worry about a child. People say that no one really knows what it is like to be a parent before their child is born. I laughed that off and thought, “Of course you can know,” but, truly, no one does. The moment a parent meets their child for the first time, their world changes. I realised that I would literally walk through walls for my child. Thankfully, my child is only one. He does not yet have any social media channels that I am aware of. If that could continue for as long as possible, I would be grateful.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) for introducing this important debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee. He made some powerful points in his speech, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response to them. I also associate myself with the remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy), who spoke so eloquently, and my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson). It is only right to start by paying tribute to Ellen and Bereaved Families for Online Safety, who are in the Public Gallery. They have raised this petition following the heartbreaking loss of Ellen’s son, Jools.”
“Giving grieving parents the right to find answers for themselves must be within our power as a Government. I encourage the Minister to do what we can to support parents and families in this absolutely heartbreaking position.”
“However, we need to do more to protect teenagers at such a vulnerable age when they are learning about themselves and about how to build the mental resilience to deal with some of the stuff that some Members of this House experience on a regular basis. Although we could have another debate on online content, we all know why we are speaking about the petition today. It concerns me that grieving parents cannot access information that may relate to the death of their children. We know that there has been a worrying rise in dangerous pranks and trends that go around on social media and in people using social media to groom and target young people, and that dangerous information is going viral—information that may have played a role in tragic and heartbreaking deaths up and down the country.”
“The hon. Member is entirely correct that, in the days before social media, bullying was confined behind the school gates and in most cases, though sadly not all, the home was a place of safety and a haven in which a teenager could recover and steel themselves for the next day. That safety has been removed by social media and people are able to get someone, wherever they are. As a teenager, I grew up with social media as it was first coming out—with Bebo, which I do not think exists anymore, and MSN Messenger. My parents had no oversight over what I was accessing or who I was talking to. Frankly, it was dangerous. That is not to question my parents’ parenting skills; they are of an age where they are still learning how to use Facebook in 2025.”
“I refer the Committee to my membership of the GMB and Community unions. The shadow Minister is keen for us all to stress our trade union membership, and we do so at the start of every sitting. He makes the point about trade union membership potentially impacting independent experts, but he will be aware that many university professors are funded by private limited companies to support their research, just as some Opposition Members are supported by private limited companies and employers for campaign purposes, none of which is declared in this Committee. Would he not say that might impact those professors’ independence too? Would that not need to be declared to ensure that the numbers are balanced?”
“Ordered, That Alex McIntyre, Jess Asato, Emily Darlington, Catherine Fookes, Dr Allison Gardner, Tom Hayes, Uma Kumaran, Alice Macdonald, Ben Maguire, Anneliese Midgley, Katrina Murray and Mrs Sarah Russell present the Bill. Alex McIntyre accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 20 June 2025, and to be printed (Bill 157).”
“In closing, I ask the House to consider the many victims and survivors who are suffering in silence today; I ask Members to think about the children and families whose lives have been torn apart by violence; and I ask all of us to think about what we as Members of this House can do to ensure that these survivors are not abandoned or left behind. Introducing two weeks of paid leave for victims of domestic abuse is a step towards a more just, compassionate and equal society. It is a commitment that we will stand by survivors, support them and never stop fighting until violence against women and girls is a thing of the past. Question put and agreed to.”
“Safe leave would start conversations in workplaces in my city of Gloucester that will help survivors and victims of domestic abuse get to safety, get the support they need and get back on their feet. Imagine living in a society in which victims and survivors of domestic abuse feel safe and empowered to seek support at work. Imagine if, having fled your home, got your children to safety and then taken legal action against your abuser, you did not have to worry about your job. You could take the time to attend court, get medical help and see your solicitor, safe in the knowledge that you had a protected and paid right to time off. That is the kind of society that I want to live in.”
“The Northern Ireland Assembly have passed the Domestic Abuse (Safe Leave) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, and are currently consulting on proposals. Residents in the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the Philippines all have the right to time off work because of the domestic abuse they have suffered. As this Government are taking a global lead on tackling violence against women and girls, I truly believe that my proposal would be a fantastic part of that agenda. Today, I hope to start a conversation in workplaces up and down the country so that employers ask themselves a very simple question: “If one of my employees was suffering from domestic abuse, would they come to us for help?” If the answer is no, surely more needs to be done. Safe leave would save lives.”
“A 2019 study by KPMG shows that businesses in the UK lost £316 million a year as a result of work-related absences due to domestic abuse. Women’s Aid and ResPublica have calculated that domestic abuse cost our society £78 billion in 2022 alone. The reality is that employers who already voluntarily offer supportive work environments, including domestic abuse leave, tend to foster loyalty, improve employee retention and create safer, happier and healthier workplaces. It is no longer enough to say that domestic abuse is a personal issue; it is an issue that should concern every workplace, every employer, and every member of this House. We do not have to look far for examples of how safe leave can be introduced in this country. In fact, parts of the United Kingdom have already begun the process of introducing safe leave.”
“Unlike the Conservative party, however, I do not believe that something should be stuck in a drawer and forgotten about just because it is difficult. That is why I propose that the Bill require the Secretary of State to come back with regulations to implement safe leave. Such a process would allow the Government to consult victims and survivors, charities such as Women’s Aid, Refuge and SafeLives, businesses and employers, and trade unions in order to tackle the difficult issues head-on and deliver for victims and survivors. Some may argue that providing paid leave for domestic abuse victims will put a burden on employers. Although such leave would be paid for by businesses, that argument misses the bigger picture. Domestic abuse already costs business and the economy.”
“Women fleeing an abusive husband should not have to call in sick and face the sack for getting their children to safety. Victims should not fear repercussions at work just for seeking help. The last Conservative Government undertook a review of domestic abuse leave and concluded that it would be too difficult to implement. I do not accept that. What I do accept is that there will be complexities in ensuring that an entitlement to paid leave works as intended, that it supports survivors and victims of domestic abuse, and that it provides a framework by which survivors and victims can feel confident in having confidential conversations at work about what they are going through at home, free from fear of repercussions or a detrimental impact on their career.”
“The demands on a survivor’s time are overwhelming, and many are forced to take holiday to give evidence against their abusers in court. Many take time off sick, only to fall foul of their employer for having too much sickness absence. Some take the impossible decision that they simply cannot afford to leave, so they remain in unsafe situations, continuing the cycle of violence. Two weeks’ paid safe leave would give victims and survivors the time they need to seek help, to find the resources they need to escape their abuser, and to start the long process of healing. Let me be clear: victims of abuse should never have to choose between their safety or their wages. Survivors should not have to take annual leave to attend court in order to see their abusers prosecuted.”
“However, I genuinely believe that this Bill could play an important part in that mission, and change the lives of victims and survivors across the country. Why this Bill? Well, perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of leaving an abusive relationship is the financial reality. Survivors often find themselves trapped in cycles of abuse, because they simply cannot afford to leave. Figures from Women’s Aid’s recent report, “The Price of Safety”, suggest that it could cost a survivor almost £50,000 to leave an abuser, based on the direct costs of fleeing and rebuilding a new life. Despite the financial burden, taking time off work is an unavoidable necessity for many victims—whether it is for medical treatment, finding a new place to live, attending court hearings, seeking legal advice or taking their children to safety.”
“I have already held a roundtable with local charities and organisations, including the Hollie Gazzard Trust, FearFree and the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service, and putting forward this Bill would not have been possible without the tireless campaigning and research of national organisations such as Women’s Aid, SafeLives and Rights of Women. I am pleased that this Government are already getting on with the job of supporting victims and survivors of domestic abuse as part of their unprecedented mission to halve violence against women and girls. We have already introduced domestic abuse specialists in 999 control rooms up and down the country and rolled out domestic abuse protection orders, which enable victims to be protected from all forms of domestic abuse, including non-physical abuse and controlling or coercive behaviour.”
“They include survivors and victims who have had to flee across the country, only to be followed by their abuser, individuals who have been prevented from having friends or even getting a job for more than a decade, and constituents who have been forced to pay their abuser’s rent long after they left the relationship. Of course, we in Gloucester all remember the horrific murder of Hollie Gazzard, which I raised at Prime Minister’s questions just before Christmas. In 2014, Hollie was murdered at work by her boyfriend after months of obsessive behaviour, jealousy and harassment. Tackling domestic abuse matters to me, and it matters to my city.”
“It is also about psychological manipulation, economic control, coercion and the isolation of victims from their friends, families and support networks. It affects people of all ages, backgrounds and walks of life. It takes a profound toll on a survivor’s physical and mental health. The trauma of abuse lingers and leaves long-lasting scars on victims that can take years, if not decades, to heal. The impact of domestic abuse has been brought home to me, as a new MP, by the constituents who have attended my surgeries across the city and shared their personal stories.”
“Although those figures may shock some Members of this House, they do not paint a full picture of the emergency that we are in. One in four women has experienced domestic abuse. At least one woman is killed by a current or former partner every week in this country. Each year, more than 75,000 people are at high or imminent risk of being murdered or seriously injured as a result of domestic abuse. Some 1.5 million domestic abuse-related incidents were recorded by police in England and Wales in the year ending March 2023, and nearly 250 people were arrested in Gloucester alone this December for domestic abuse-related offences. Behind all the statistics, however, is a human being—a person in our society, our communities and cities like mine who has faced unimaginable pain and suffering. Domestic abuse is not just about physical violence.”
“I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision for an entitlement to paid safe leave for victims of domestic abuse; and for connected purposes. Domestic abuse is a national emergency. All Members of this House will have been contacted by women and men in their constituencies who have suffered from domestic abuse at some point in their lives. According to SafeLives, approximately 2.1 million people in the UK have experienced some form of domestic abuse. Sadly, the majority are women, and I will refer today to the Government’s mission to tackle violence against women and girls. But we should not forget that 750,000 of those survivors are men, and Office for National Statistics data shows that one in seven men has experienced domestic abuse.”
“I am interested to hear whether the Conservative party’s position is now that the national minimum wage should also be abolished.”
“I refer to my membership of the Community and GMB unions. In the break, the shadow Minister challenged me, saying that I had been very quiet this morning—I was feeling festive, but perhaps I am feeling less festive now. Let us take the analogy about choice that he is trying to set out and put it in a slightly different context. Private limited companies are often seen as the drivers of growth, and we have heard lots about that from the Opposition. Those companies have lots of freedoms to make decisions and to invest where they want, but they are all subject to the national minimum wage. Is the shadow Minister suggesting that a national set of terms and conditions will remove academies’ freedom to make entrepreneurial decisions?”
“I refer the Committee to my membership of the GMB and Community unions. I have two short questions for the shadow Minister. First, if the changes are so positive for employees, can they not simply accept a change to their terms and conditions? Secondly, let us take the scenario that he describes, where there is a change in processes, and put that in a business-to-business context. Say a business moves from wooden cogs and to metal cogs, and it has a contract with the wooden cog supplier. Is he aware of any circumstances in which that business would be able simply to break that contract without any notice or legal recompense to the other business?”
“I refer to my membership of the GMB union and the Community trade union. I shall come on to some of the nonsense we are hearing around free speech. I ask a direct question, seeing as we seem to be equating jokes with harassment: does the shadow Minister know the definition of harassment under the Equality Act and would he share that with the Committee so that we may understand what we are talking about here?”
“I am afraid the shadow Minister does not know the definition under the Equality Act. If he did, he would know that the conduct is required to either violate someone’s dignity or create “an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment”. That conduct has to be related to someone’s protected characteristic: sex, race, gender or their sexuality. We are talking about very serious circumstances. They fall short of the criminal definition of harassment, but they are within the Equality Act definition. There is already a test within the current law to avoid some of the free speech arguments the shadow Minister is making. He is seeking to trivialise the experience of many people in those industries who face unacceptable harassment in the workplace.”
“I think the shadow Minister has already answered this question. What protected characteristic were any of those jokes related to? This is the point. It is not to stop people being comedians. If someone sits in the front row of a Ross Noble gig, they are bound to get picked on. If the joke relates to a protected characteristic, that is where it crosses the line into harassment. The example that the shadow Minister has just given is a good example of where this would not be triggered, because none of the jokes related to a protected characteristic.”
“Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in the example that the hon. Member for West Suffolk just cited, IPSO found that there was no harassment, and therefore there was a finding under clause 12(i) of the editors’ code of practice, rather than clause 3?”
“Therefore, for something to be harassment, it must be unwanted conduct relating to somebody’s protected characteristic and create an offensive environment, or one that degrades, humiliates or embarrasses individuals. The hon. Member for West Suffolk tried to introduce a few examples around the free speech argument, but those did not support the argument that he tried to make. The Independent Press Standards Organisation found that there was no harassment in the Gareth Roberts case. It found that there was a lower form of conduct in relation to clause 12(i) of the IPSO code of practice, but there was no harassment.”
“As we enter the Christmas party season, we will see a massive increase in workplace harassment—not just sexual harassment, but other forms of harassment. This is perhaps where we got into some confusion this morning. There are different types of harassment, and the type that we talked about in particular this morning was harassment under the Equality Act 2010. That has a very specific definition, which will not be changed by the proposed legislation, despite what the shadow Minister said. A different test will be applied to that definition in terms of when it might come into play, but the definition of harassment will not change.”
“This clause is a vital part of the legislation, because we know—we heard this in evidence a few weeks ago—that harassment does not always come from a fellow employee or an employer. Quite often, it can come from third parties, particularly in some of the sectors that the Opposition seek to exclude with their amendment. We heard particularly from UKHospitality about the impact of third-party harassment in the hospitality sector, and I have shared my experience of being harassed in the workplace while working in the hospitality sector as a 15-year-old. This is really important. My example was only one—frankly, there will be thousands of examples—and I know that my experience as a young man will be very different from the experiences of women working in hospitality up and down the country.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this afternoon, Mr Stringer. I welcome the Bill, and this clause is a really important part of it. We are introducing the clause to improve the workplace treatment of individuals who suffer harassment. Before the lunch break, we heard an interesting interpretation of the legislation, but sadly, it was not correct in all places, and I would like to go through some points made by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire. As part of that, I will reflect from the beginning that the Fawcett Society has found that 40% of women have experienced workplace harassment, and women who are marginalised for other reasons, such as race or disability, face an increased risk of and different forms of harassment, including sexual harassment in the workplace.”
“The Bill requires employers to have policies in place to deal with that. We cannot legislate for the unknown. We cannot legislate for serious circumstances that we cannot predict or for every individual who walks into a bar, but we can have policies in place to deal with those things.”
“If the club employs a member of bar staff who has a protected characteristic and the comedian on stage consistently and absolutely humiliates them because of it, one might expect the employer to take some reasonable steps, such as not booking that comedian again, so that the individual is not consistently humiliated on a regular basis because of one of their protected characteristics. That is what the Bill is intended to do. We are not saying that employers are required to stop all harassment in the workplace; that would not be possible. As the shadow Minister rightly said, there will be cases when somebody comes into a bar during a Christmas party, inebriated, having enjoyed far too much free wine, and says something that is offensive and horrifically wrong, and with which we all across this House would disagree.”
“Jokes are fine unless they start to become unwanted and are aimed at protected characteristics, such as someone’s gender, gender identity or sexual orientation. The other point that that example missed—we spoke at length about comedy clubs, and I hate to raise them again—is that the Bill is not about punters at a comedy club being offended by what they hear on stage; it is about protecting the employees. For somebody to trigger this legislation, the comedian would have to make a joke directed at one of the employee’s protected characteristics.”
“I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, but the fact is that in these circumstances, the definition in the Equality Act is clear. There is already an abundance of case law on what constitutes harassment, particularly in relation to the Equality Act, the different types of protected characteristics and the actions required to reach that threshold. The threshold is not just that there is unwanted conduct or that it relates to a protected characteristic; it is about the environment that is created. There is an abundance of case law on that point. The second example was about my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary, but again it missed the point entirely. We all enjoy comedy, which is a staple of our culture.”