Sir Roger Gale
MP for Herne Bay and Sandwich · Conservative · United Kingdom
“In welcoming the Prime Minister to his place, let me say that I noticed his criticism of the water companies—a justified criticism, in many cases. May I direct his attention to the predatory activities of another private company?”
“The Secretary of State appears to think it is scaremongering to suggest that, with effect from this weekend, passenger and freight traffic using the channel tunnel and the port of Dover will be disrupted as a result of the European entry and exit system.”
“Before I call Esther McVey to move the motion, and then the Minister to respond, I remind Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of the Member in charge of the debate. No such notice has been given.”
“As the Minister has indicated, over the spring bank holiday there was chaos at Dover, at St Pancras and at the channel tunnel because of the failure of the EES. The French authorities were quite simply not prepared or able to implement the facilities properly.”
“This House has the capacity to criticise, but it also has the capacity to be fair. The Minister probably finds himself between a rock and a cliff face in a situation that he did not make himself. That does not absolve the MCA from the criticism that has rightly been levelled at it earlier today.”
“To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what measures the Government have put in place to ensure that in the coming holiday season, travellers and business freight are not delayed at our ports, our international railway stations and our airports as a result of the imposition of the European entry and exit system.”
The complete record
Every one of 723 lines we hold for Sir Roger Gale, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 15.
“I believe that if that is done, then this matter will be referred, entirely properly, to the Privileges Committee, and then after the King’s Speech we can get on with our job and devote our concerns to the cost of living, fuel prices and the manner in which hospitality businesses are being destroyed, and to all the matters that we ought to be discussing today, rather than discussing this. I beg my friends on the Government Benches to do the right thing tonight.”
“My right hon. Friend reminds me that he said, incorrectly, that the vote on the call for Johnson to resign was not taken until after the Privileges Committee had released its findings. He is quite wrong: that call was made well before it went to the Privileges Committee. Let me come back to what I was trying to say. Every single one of us has to be able to look in the mirror and live with ourselves. I hope very much that the Government Whips will withdraw the whipping tonight, so that hon. Members can vote according to their conscience.”
“My right hon. Friend knows that I have been gravely concerned about this issue. I, too, commend her on a very hard-fought fight, but I remain concerned that we had a vehicle before us, in Lord Nash’s amendment, which would have dealt with the programme now—not in five, six, 10 or 12 months’ time. I hope very much that when the Minister replies she will confirm that it will be adhered to. If it is not, then this House will regard that as a matter of bad faith. I do not propose to vote against the Government tonight if my right hon. Friend has struck that agreement.”
“It seems to me as though the Government are just kicking the can down the road. We have an opportunity in the legislation before us, and particularly in Lord Nash’s amendment—which we are not being allowed to vote on as I understand it—to limit the use of social media outlets to those who are over 16. We also have the opportunity to tighten very seriously the regulations relating to the use of mobile phones in schools, but again, there is a loophole. Why are we being so wishy-washy?”
“Let me try again with the question that I put to the Minister. We have the opportunity today to carry a motion tabled in the other House that would introduce the ban. The can is being kicked down the road. We cannot have consultation indefinitely. The question on the consultation paper is not, “How do we do this?”, but, “Shall we do it?” That is not necessary—am I right?”
“Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) said, we have the opportunity in the House of Commons, through this vehicle that is available to us, to take action this day, not in three months’ time, six months’ time or two years’ time. If we do not take this opportunity, a generation of young people will suffer, and we will be responsible. There is no need for that to happen. Geriatric though I may be, I understand the difference in definition between a smartphone and a brick phone. It is perfectly possible for any child who has to have a phone to have a brick phone, at very modest cost, so that they can communicate on medically essential matters, or if there are caring issues. That is not a problem. We are not talking about brick phones; we are talking about smartphones.”
“I have a very personal interest in this: I have five grandchildren, ranging in age from 15 to nine, and there are another five Ukrainian children in roughly the same age group living with my family. I want to see all of those young people protected. I understand peer pressure only too well. I understand that if one child has a smartphone, every child has to have a smartphone, or they feel left out. However, I know from all the surveys that have been carried out that the overwhelming majority of young people are crying out for guidelines, and for the ban that will make them all feel the same, and not feel excluded. As my right hon.”
“I do understand what the hon. Lady is saying. Those cases are very few and far between, and there can always be exceptions, where they are medically necessary. I do not believe that is a problem. I am saying to the Minister that we have an opportunity today to legislate. Do not prevaricate; do it!”
“Many Members of the House, possibly including you, Mr Speaker, will have received communications from retired civil servants who are facing personal and financial distress as a result of the failure of Capita—the company handling the pensions—to deliver properly. Will the Leader of the House be good enough to write to the Cabinet Secretary and ask her to get a grip and sort out this mess, and seek to ensure that Capita receives no further Government contracts of any kind until this matter is fully, finally and satisfactorily resolved?”
“Order. I think six Members are standing. I will call the Front Benchers at 10.30 am. I will not impose a time limit at this stage, but around six minutes a head should ensure that everybody who wishes to be called is called.”
“I will call Anna Dixon to move the motion and then I will call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate, the Minister and the Chair, although no such requests have been made. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up the debate.”
“Does the Secretary of State understand that the remarks that he made on Sky television prior to the recess about the maternity unit at the Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother hospital in Margate were ill informed, anachronistic, deeply offensive and damaging to morale? I was heavily involved, and have been since, in the events following the death of baby Harry Richford at the hospital, and also in Bill Kirkup’s report. Massive improvements have been made since then, but the thing that is missing is the funding that was promised by the previous Government for the improvement of the real estate. When is that money going to be forthcoming?”
“Violence against women and girls comes in many forms. I have discovered that, incredibly, while current legislation provides some protection for women and girls against revenge porn, it offers no such protection where images are clothed but accompanied by offensive material. Will the Minister take a long, hard look at that to see how the law can be strengthened so that those protections are afforded?”
“I am sorely tempted to say that if somebody else would like to take the Chair, I will come down and do an hour on this myself, but happily for colleagues, I am not allowed to.”
“As the hon. Lady said, there are occasions when quality makes up for quantity, and the House has behaved in an exemplary manner this afternoon. Thank you for your courtesy. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 737660 relating to automatic by-elections following Member defections.”
“There are thousands of Ukrainians in this country—most of them women and children—who are effectively stateless. They did not come here as asylum seekers; they came as refugees. They do not know whether they are coming or going. They cannot return to their country, and there is no prospect of them being able to in the short or medium term. They need to be able to determine accommodation, education and employment, so what will the Government do to create some sort of proper settled status for Ukrainian refugees?”
“May I first say that I do not know of anybody on the Conservative Benches who would not wish to associate themselves with the Secretary of State’s praise for the courage and determination of our armed services, both worldwide and particularly in Cyprus? I have to declare an interest, Madam Deputy Speaker; as you know, I am an honorary citizen of Cyprus. The Republic of Cyprus has maintained a principled neutrality that has served British nationals and others well over many years. Akrotiri is based almost exactly between Paphos and Larnaca—it is a very difficult situation for the Secretary of State to square. Will he tell the House what steps will be taken to protect the many British nationals resident in Cyprus and the many other British visitors who have hitherto gone to the island for their holidays?”
“Order. It is obvious that a large number of Members wish to participate in the debate; time is going to be very short. Before we embark on the inevitable round of interventions, which are perfectly permitted, I remind hon. Members who intervene that they are expected to remain for the whole debate.”
“Order. Could colleagues who wish to speak please remain standing while the Clerk ticks off the names? I do not normally do this from the Chair, but 10 Members have put forward their names in advance; I propose to call them first. In order, on the Opposition Benches they are Peter Bedford, Danny Kruger, John Cooper, Wera Hobhouse, John Glen and Jim Shannon. On the Government Benches they are Brian Leishman, Patrick Hurley and Terry Jermy. I am going to put a time limit of three minutes on each speech; that should take us—allowing for interventions—to just past quarter past 3. We have to call the Front Benchers at 3.30 pm, so there should be a little wriggle room at the end for anybody who was not on that list and wishes to speak. Otherwise, your card is marked, so intervene.”
“Order. I am terribly sorry; I appreciate that there are conflicting demands on Members, but the hon. Lady must be aware that if a Member comes in late, it is quite straightforward: no intervention.”
“Order. Colleagues will have noticed that I have deliberately allowed the Minister to overrun her time because, given the time, it seemed important that she was able to respond fully to the debate. I now have to remind the Minister that I want the right hon. Gentleman who introduced the debate to have time to wind up properly.”
“I will call Mark Sewards to move the motion. I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. That does not apply to interventions, which are in order. There will be no opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention in 30-minute debates.”
“Order. In the time available for this debate, that almost constitutes a speech. I had intended to say this after the hon. Gentleman moved the motion, but I had better say it now: please understand that any person who intervenes in this debate will be expected to stay until the end. It is not a case of speak and go.”
“Order. We are faced with a very difficult situation. I have to call the Front-Bench spokespeople at 5.10 pm, which means, given the number of people on the speakers’ list, I am going to start with a time limit of two minutes. That may not get everybody in. I am not going to call anybody who has already intervened, for a start, and if anybody else feel like dropping out and intervening, I would welcome that. I do not normally do this, but it may help if I give Members the batting order as it stands at the moment: on the Opposition Benches, we have Danny Chambers, Olly Glover, Edward Morello, Tim Farron, John Milne, Roz Savage and Jim Shannon, and on the Government Benches, we have Barry Gardiner, Terry Jermy, Martin Rhodes, Michelle Welsh, Rachael Maskell, Tristan Osborne and Anna Gelderd.”
“Mr Speaker, you will recall that, some months ago, I asked the Prime Minister why, as the Director of Public Prosecutions, he did not bring charges against Mohammed Fayed for rape and assault, and the Prime Minister replied that this did not cross his desk. I understand that the Met police delivered two dossiers to the Crown Prosecution Service, so if the Prime Minister did not see them, who did, and could he tell the House when he expects the Metropolitan police to bring charges against those who aided and abetted Fayed?”
“If there is a peace—and, please God, there will be soon—and on a sound basis, there will still be a phenomenal amount of reconstruction, in the centre and the east of Ukraine in particular, to be carried out before anybody has homes to return to. Depending on the nature of the deal, there will be people who either will not be able to return home because it is still occupied, or whose homes will have been so destroyed that physically there will be nowhere for them to go.”
“Ukraine has already sacrificed the largest part of a generation of its finest young men and women in armed conflict, as well as all the civilians who have suffered. Again, that includes the thousands of children, who have been referred to many times in this House, who have been abducted and are now being indoctrinated somewhere within the neo-Soviet Union. They have to be repatriated. The Father of the House made the point, absolutely rightly, that peace cannot mean peace at any price if we are to honour the dead and those who have sacrificed so much in Ukraine in fighting for their democracy and their country, as well as for ours. Although the Secretary of State was right to say that there are thousands of Ukrainians yearning for the opportunity to return home, when that will actually be possible is a moot point.”
“It behoves all of us to stand as firmly as we can, and to send out the message that “for as long as it takes” means for as long as it takes. I want to follow on from the remarks made by the hon. Member for Coatbridge and Bellshill (Frank McNally), and to concentrate a bit of time on the diaspora—the expat Ukrainians living throughout Europe, and particularly in the United Kingdom. The Secretary of State said in his opening remarks that thousands of Ukrainians are yearning for the opportunity to return home. I am sure that is true, and he also went on to say that he hopes that there will be peace this year. Again, I do not suppose that anybody in the House or across the United Kingdom does not want the bloodshed to stop.”
“The Baltic states, Georgia, Moldova and the United Kingdom fought that through the night—literally—in an unprecedented display of parliamentary unity, but we lost. We were beaten hands down. The following day, the Russian delegation was back in the Hemicycle in Strasbourg. I do not think it is stretching it too far to say that the message that we sent out was profoundly wrong and almost certainly influenced Putin’s belief that he could probably invade Ukraine with impunity. It has been said over and over again, and absolutely rightly, that Ukraine is fighting for our democracy. If Putin were allowed to win, it would not stop there. Next would be Georgia, Moldova and then possibly the Baltic states. If that were to happen, NATO would be involved and we would probably have world war three, so the stakes are rather high.”
“May I first join the Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), in thanking the Secretary of State for Defence for the power of his words, and for the manner in which he has spoken for the Parliament of the United Kingdom, and not just for the Government? I do not think there is a Member of the House who would quarrel with anything he said, and the message that has to go out from this place is that we stand united with Ukraine. There is a danger. In 2014 the Russians annexed Crimea. At the time, Russia was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and it was compelled to withdraw. In 2018 the Parliamentary Assembly, of which the Father of the House and I were both members at the time, voted almost overwhelmingly to re-admit the Russian Federation.”
“So please, Minister, take that message away and see what can be done, working with the Home Secretary and the Foreign Secretary, to now regularise the position in the interests not just of them, but of the United Kingdom as well.”
“I would like the Minister to go back to his colleagues in the Department and the Secretary of State to take this to Cabinet, to say that we really have to recognise that, however sensitive the immigration issue is—as I of course understand—there is a group of people living in this country, contributing to our way of life now, culturally, as has been said earlier, who have to be regularised. They must have a pathway to settlement so that the young people can go to school and on to college, and can qualify and build lives here. President Zelensky wants his people to return home, and we want them to be able to return home, but for the moment and for the foreseeable future that is not possible.”
“Every school holiday, Olena returns to Kharkiv, where her mother is living in a bombed-out flat, so that she can treat children and frontline soldiers who otherwise cannot get dental care, but she is not allowed to practise here. I do not want to put the Minister on the spot today, but I say to him that we must sort out the longer-term future for these people, who are not even classed as refugees—they are stateless and have no actual status in this country. We have generously, initially, made them welcome, but we have now reached the point where we have to take some decisions for the longer term.”
“Like so many other young Ukrainians of that age, she is now between a rock and a hard place, because she does not know how long she will be allowed to remain in the United Kingdom. There are also professional people who cannot work here and would like to return home, but who need to be enabled to establish a proper professional life in the United Kingdom. I will give the Minister one example: Dr Olena Hubska, now a personal friend of ours, who is the mother of two of those children. She is a fully qualified dentist and has 16 years in practice as a hospital doctor, but the General Dental Council will not allow her to practise here, despite the fact that the country is crying out for dentists. I am told there are some 200 others like her with such qualifications. That is nonsense.”
“The hon. Lady is absolutely right to pay tribute to the farmers and to highlight the phenomenal difficulty of clearing mines. The HALO Trust has experience of that around the world, and it will take years, not months. For all those reasons, I say to the Minister—I was going to say my hon. Friend—that this is a sensitive issue, but there are scores of Ukrainians living in the United Kingdom who regard the UK as home, because they have to: they have no choice. My wife and I have five young people whom we now regard as grandchildren, two in one family and three in another, ranging from teenaged down to the cot. Last weekend, a young lady—young in my terms—came to my surgery. She has a 16-year-old daughter who wants to go to college.”
“Could the Minister clarify whether or not the Cabinet Secretary’s review into Lord Mandelson will be advised by the Cabinet Office propriety and ethics team? I ask for two reasons. First, I think I am right in saying that it was the PET that undertook the original so-called due diligence on Lord Mandelson. Secondly, in the light of the question asked by the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) a few moments ago about the involvement of the PET in an earlier unsavoury matter, I am not sure that the House will have much confidence in that team.”
“National Grid is one of the large, national, private companies run by the wealthy and powerful in society that the Secretary of State derided in his statement. It is seeking to build, on the edge of an area of scientific interest and a nature reserve, a 90-foot high converter station covering the size of five football pitches. Local people, whom the Secretary of State claims to champion, do not want this. Will the Secretary of State champion the local people and consign this project to the dustbin of history where it belongs?”
“I suppose I ought to declare an interest, Madam Deputy Speaker. [ Laughter. ] The right hon. Gentleman will understand that we welcome the adherence to the triple lock that my party introduced. He will also know that there are tens of thousands of expatriate United Kingdom citizens whose pensions have been, and remain, frozen at the point at which they left the United Kingdom, in spite of the fact that they have paid their full taxes and national insurance contributions throughout their working lives in the UK. The last Government, to our shame, failed to address this issue. Do this Government have any plans to do so?”
“On 8 January, the United States Secretary of the Interior wrote to the Secretary of State on behalf of the big game hunting industry, asking her to ensure that the Government would abandon their commitment to the ban on importing hunting trophies. In her reply, will she give a robust indication that this Government are committed to that ban?”
“Much has been said, rightly, in support of the women and girls who suffered at the hands of Epstein. Another group who must not be forgotten are the dozens of young women who were raped and sexually assaulted by Mohamed Fayed. Fayed is dead and has been judged in a higher place, but those who aided and abetted him are still under investigation by the Metropolitan police, and they must be brought to justice. That investigation is taking too long. Will the Leader of the House please invite the Home Secretary to make a statement about the progress of that inquiry and to indicate when some action may be brought in support of these ladies?”
“Further to the question put to the Secretary of State by the Chairman of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah), my teenage informant tells me that if you ask them the right question, most US-based search engines will tell you how to access the dark web. That is clearly undesirable, so what are we doing to stop it?”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is an embarrassment that a Foreign Office Minister was unable to vote during this crucial debate on the Chagos islands. I wonder if you could have a word with the Speaker and see if it would be possible to extend the time limit to allow people to get to the Chamber?”
“In East Kent, there is a company called HatHats, which runs coffee bars. The proprietor philanthropically employs hard-to-employ young people. In the last 12 months for which figures are available, the profit on all 25 of its outlets was £12. As a direct result of this Government’s policies, those young people are losing out on the opportunities that the Minister is describing.”
“They want the dignity of being able to go out, to do a hard day’s work, whether that is washing up in a café, picking fruit in an orchard or whatever, and to get a pay packet at the end of it that they have earned and can spend as they want. That is the dignity of employment, and that is what I fear this Government are denying them.”
“A lovely riverside pub, the Dog and Duck, in a place bizarrely known as Plucks Gutter, has shut. The young couple who were running it—they had a splendid summer season—found that business crashed at the end of the summer. They could not afford to pay the staff along with paying for the rates, the food, the electricity and everything else that goes with running a good little riverside pub, so it has gone. Please God, it will come back again, but that couple have had to retrench, and they put their heart and soul into it. It is no good. We do not want a sticking plaster, and we do not want schemes. We do not want to be told, “Yes, you can do this and you can do that. There are these opportunities.” These young people—soon it will be my grandchildren—want jobs.”
“I may be getting on a bit, but I can remember my first job washing up in a restaurant in Stratford-upon-Avon. I needed to earn some money, and I was able to walk in and do it, and that is not happening now. Businesses are laying off staff, rather than taking them on. As my right hon. Friend the Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) said earlier, it is young people who are not being employed. Why? It is a direct result of the fiscal policies of this Government. Directly or indirectly, it is national insurance, business rates, the cost of inputs and the cost of electricity. People cannot run a restaurant or a pub without heating and lighting or food to put on the table. There are pubs closing in my constituency. A couple of weeks ago, I heard of another.”
“Friend the shadow Secretary of State knows, people in the construction trades in east Kent are being laid off. House building is grinding to a halt, houses are not selling and the market is flat. That is all as a result of the Government’s fiscal policies. In towns in my constituency such as Herne Bay, Sandwich, Birchington-on-Sea and Westgate-on-Sea, many of the jobs are hospitality-based. They are either directly in hospitality—pubs, restaurants and small hotels—or they are dependent upon the visitors that those businesses attract, such as the seaside amusement arcades and Dreamland in Margate. All these businesses are dependent on people having money to spend to be able to employ staff. Those staff are not being taken on, and those staff are the young people.”
“I will be very brief, Madam Deputy Speaker. In her remarks earlier, the hon. Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan), who is a Kent Member of Parliament, rightly praised the work of MidKent College and the training in construction trades that it is offering young people. I will add my praise for the work of the east Kent colleges, which is in a similar vein—they are also doing a tremendous job under quite difficult circumstances. However, there is little point in offering that training in skills, only to see disappointment at the end of it because the opportunities have gone. When a young man or young woman trains as an electrician, plumber or bricklayer, they expect to then go on to earn money in a job as an electrician, plumber or bricklayer. As my hon.”
“I understand only too well the need for policing to keep pace with the same tools that are used by the criminals, but will the Home Secretary tell the House whether or not this plan has the confidence of the constabulary?”
“Kent is one of the largest counties in the country. It faces significant geographic challenges. We have the channel tunnel; Dover, the largest port of entry into the United Kingdom; Manston airport, which is likely to reopen; and, of course, the small matter of illegal migration across the channel. I cannot see how a policing area that I understand will stretch from Banbury in Oxfordshire to Herne Bay on the North sea coast and Sandwich on the channel coast, will be policed effectively and locally, as it currently is. I am, I think, one of the only Members of this House who has held a warrant as a serving police officer— [ Interruption. ] I did say “one of the only”, not “the only one”.”