YouSaid · the spoken record
Louise Haigh
Lines from Political Thinking with Nick Robinson have been withdrawn from this page while we check who is speaking. See the correction.
On the record 2015–2026
hansard
This is everything the corpus holds for Louise Haigh. It is not everything they have said on the record.
Every line below is reproduced as it was said and credited to the record it came from, and links to that record wherever it can be linked. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections
“He now needs to show the leadership that has been so sorely lacking: the Government must stop casting around and blaming everyone but themselves. Will he set out to the House the immediate plan to address the long-standing issues of recruitment, training and rest day working? What steps is he taking to end the industrial dispute that has now been ongoing for over a year? Can he confirm when he last held talks with the employers and the unions to bring the dispute to an end? Strike action is imminent but he still has an opportunity to avoid it. Can it really be the case that he has not met the unions and the employers for more than five months? If that is correct it is a truly shocking dereliction of duty. The Secretary of State’s decision today must be the start of something more fundamental.”
House of Commons11 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Since the Conservatives came to office, the east coast franchise has collapsed and been taken over, Northern Rail followed, and then London and Southeastern. For the Conservatives to have nationalised one railway may be regarded as misfortune; to have nationalised four demonstrates something much more fundamental. The privatised model they have rigidly lauded in the face of all evidence is collapsing. Passengers see services get visibly, demonstrably worse while hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is handed to shareholders without the faintest hint of competition. How much longer will people be asked to rely on a system that so routinely fails? The Secretary of State’s decision today must just be the start.”
House of Commons11 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It has been an issue not just for the last few months, as Ministers claim, but for years. Seven years ago—well before covid—TransPennine Express had exactly the same staff shortages it suffers from today. It failed to address the issues that passengers are still experiencing. That it managed to keep this contract for so long, and to be told only months ago that it was in line for an eight-year extension, is extraordinary. The difficult truth for the Secretary of State today is this: his decision shines an unforgiving light on the fractured railways his party is responsible for. This endless cycle of private operators having to be taken over shows the rail system is fundamentally broken. The comprehensive failure of TransPennine Express is not a bug in the system; it is a feature of it.”
House of Commons11 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. After years of comprehensive failure, after tens of millions in taxpayer cash has been handed to an operator so clearly not fit for purpose, after needless damage has been wrought on the northern economy and more than six months after Labour demanded it, the Tories have finally accepted that they can no longer defend the indefensible. They have seen the writing on the wall, and the only question passengers will be asking today is: what stopped the Secretary of State taking action sooner? How on earth did it take this long? Let us just be clear about the failure that, until now, has been allowed to go on unchecked. This operator has broken records for cancellations. Almost one in five services last year did not run and fewer than half the services were on time.”
House of Commons11 May 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sometimes you just have to admire the brass neck of the Conservative party. As Chancellor, the Prime Minister personally slashed the pothole budget by £400 million, which is enough to fill 8 million potholes. Lined up side by side, that giant Tory pothole would stretch from here to John O’Groats and back again. Will the Minister accept that after 13 years, the British public see that our roads, like the Tories’ excuses, are full of holes?”
House of Commons20 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last year, the Prime Minister said: “Smart motorways are unpopular because they are unsafe.” Yet last week he confirmed that he would leave 400 miles- worth in place. Will the Secretary of State tell the House how many breakdowns were missed by the stationary vehicle detection system on our smart motorway network last year?”
House of Commons20 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The combination of smart motorways and faulty technology is giving drivers serious cause for concern. Last year, more than 4,000 breakdowns were missed by that faulty technology. That shocking statistic shows that motorists have been left at risk by the Government’s shambolic roll-out of smart motorways. Will the Secretary of State do the right thing and urgently reinstate the hard shoulder?”
House of Commons20 April 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Labour will end the fractured, fragmented system holding our railways back and put passengers back at the heart of our rail network, prioritising long-term decision making. But the message that today’s decision sends could not be clearer. Under the Conservatives, our broken railways are here to stay. Under the Conservatives, passengers will always come last.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Then, as now, it blamed staff shortages and the unions. It said then that it would recruit drivers and improve resilience. Then, as now, the Government shrugged their shoulders and let it off the hook as performance plummeted. The Secretary of State dismisses as pointless debates about the future of railways—little wonder, when the answer to the enormous challenges facing the railways is always more of the status quo. The Conservatives promised competition that would serve passengers and lower fares; instead, as is happening today, contracts are awarded without the faintest hint of competition while fares rise again and again, and passengers suffer. Their answer to it all is more of the same: the same failing operators; the same waste and fragmentation; the same broken system.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In one month, almost a quarter of services were badly delayed. That is higher than during the chaos in August and during the height of the pandemic. That is not all. Under the Secretary of State’s so-called improvement plan, the number of trains on time actually fell to just one third. If that is what success looks like to the Government, is it any wonder that people question whether anything in this country works any more? They look on in disbelief as the answer to this prolonged failure is always millions more in taxpayers’ cash. This issue matters because across the north, services remain in chaos. Today alone, more than 35 services have been cancelled on TransPennine Express. This has been an issue for not months but years. Six years ago, TransPennine Express had exactly the same issues that it faces today.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, passengers across the midlands, the north and Scotland, Members from both sides of the House, and possibly you, Mr Speaker, will be looking on in disbelief today as millions more in taxpayer cash is handed to an operator that is so demonstrably failing passengers. For the Secretary of State to stand at the Dispatch Box and hail a turnaround in the service demonstrates how staggeringly out of touch he is with the lived reality of people in this country. The figures speak for themselves. Over the past six months, under the Secretary of State’s intensive improvement plan, Avanti West Coast has broken several records—records for delays and cancellations: the highest ever number of trains more than 15 minutes late and the highest single month of cancellations since records began.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. What a relief it is to see him in his place. Since he announced huge changes on HS2, affecting billions of pounds of investment and jobs, costs to the taxpayer and particularly affecting the north of England, this is the first we have seen or heard from him. You can call the search party off, Mr Speaker. I welcome the deal on Network Rail, but it is overdue. After 10 months in which the Government refused to negotiate and, according to the chief executive of Network Rail, engaged in “noisy political rhetoric” that had been “counterproductive” to negotiations, a compromise has finally been made.”
House of Commons20 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does this announcement not prove once and for all that the Conservatives cannot fix the problem because the Conservatives are the problem.”
House of Commons14 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It admits that they will cost jobs and that construction firms could go bust; it cannot rule out slashing high-speed trains that serve Stoke, Macclesfield and Stafford altogether; and it suggests that HS2 could terminate on the outskirts of London until 2041. Is it not time that the Minister came clean that this absurd plan will hit jobs, hurt growth and cost taxpayers even more? As his own officials ask, “you have already changed the design once, which wasted money. What will be different this time?” Even the Government have lost faith in this Government, and little wonder. Is there anything more emblematic of this failed Government than their flagship levelling-up project that makes it neither to the north nor to central London? Last year they crashed the economy, and once again they are asking the country to pay the price.”
House of Commons14 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Eighteen months ago, the Government slashed Northern Powerhouse Rail, binned HS2 to Leeds and sold out the north of England. Here we are again: huge changes affecting billions in investment and jobs announced at 5 pm on Thursday—minutes before the House rose. We now know why the Secretary of State was desperate to dodge scrutiny: I have a leaked document written by his most senior officials that blows apart his claims and lays bare the consequences of the decisions he has hidden from. His chief justification for the delays to HS2 was to “balance the nation’s books”, but his Department admits what he will not—that the delays themselves will increase costs.”
House of Commons14 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“TransPennine Express has been providing unacceptable levels of service to the north and the midlands for years—well prior to covid—and now they are at truly dire levels. The operator of last resort has made it clear to the Transport Committee that it has capacity and can bring TransPennine Express under its remit. Is the Secretary of State confirming that for ideological reasons he will refuse to step in and provide a better service to the north and the midlands?”
House of Commons2 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last month I was delighted to visit the Hitachi Rail manufacturing facility in Newton Aycliffe, where 800 highly skilled employees are delivering world-class manufacturing excellence. They told me that they need certainty from the Government, but briefings, leaks and rumour about the future of HS2 are pouring out of this Department. Will the Minister categorically deny that his Department is working on any plans that would slash what is left of the eastern leg and leave Yorkshire and the north-east permanently entirely cut off by cutting high-speed platforms at Euston?”
House of Commons2 March 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister commit to publishing the seafarers welfare charter—he has been asked to do so many times today—which is the Government’s preferred option for setting minimum conditions for rostering, pensions and other aspects of seafarer employment, and explain why progress in agreeing it has stalled since August? Will he further consider making it mandatory for employers to sign it, so that it is truly binding and drives up conditions across the sector?”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will shock millions across this country to learn of the shameful model that too many ferry companies employ. People are working up to 91 hours a week and are on board for 17 weeks without any entitlement to shore leave. They are not entitled to any pension, and they are not entitled to any sick pay when outside of UK waters. That is precisely why we need a strong, legally binding seafarers charter on the face of the Bill—one that ends the race to the bottom that P&O Ferries has so cynically exploited. Regrettably, Ministers rejected that amendment.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Regrettably, as the Bill stands, operators fall within the scope of the Bill if they call at a UK port only 120 days within a year—this has been debated at length this afternoon—while regular operators who call at UK ports once a week are excluded from the provision. Given that the Minister has rejected the call expressed so clearly across the House, we hope that there will be very close monitoring of the application of the legislation to ensure that the loophole is not exploited as we fear it will be. Above all, the P&O scandal was supposed to represent a line in the sand for seafarers’ rights. The current situation means that many ferry operators are reliant on the low-cost crewing model that P&O exploited on 17 March. That exploitation is every bit as much about the conditions and rights of those seafarers as it is about pay.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Every day Peter Hebblethwaite remains in charge of P&O Ferries, other employers who wish to undermine the rights of British workers will find comfort. The truth is that if P&O Ferries or any of its low-cost rivals wanted to act in precisely the same way again, nothing in this legislation would stop them doing so. That is why we regret that amendments were not made to close the loopholes that P&O exploited in the first place. There was a refusal to consult, and a refusal to notify. The Bill does nothing to address those glaring loopholes. We know that bad bosses will exploit every loophole, so there can be no doubt, no room for manoeuvre, no scope for avoidance—that is why we pushed to close the port-hopping provisions for good.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Because six months on, it remains nothing short of a scandal that this Dubai-owned company, which received millions in taxpayers’ money during the pandemic, tore up the rights of British workers while its profits soared. And six months on, the chief executive, his board and those who deliberately and consciously broke the law in plain sight have faced no consequences whatsoever. They trampled over the rights of British workers, they came to this Parliament and boasted about it, they said they would do it all over again, and they have faced no consequences. Whichever way we look at it, the message this sends to rogue employers around the world is simple: they can attack the rights of British workers on our shores with impunity.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendments 3 to 10 beef up the enforcement and compliance of the provisions, amendment 26 allows for an unlimited fine to be imposed for breaching minimum wage provisions, and amendment 17 deletes the provision allowing operators to retain their revenue after a fine and ensures that it goes towards seafarer welfare. My hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), the shadow Minister, called for all those amendments in Committee, so we are very grateful to the Minister for this progress. Fundamentally, however, as we have heard throughout this debate, the test for this Bill is whether it will end the exploitative practices that have become commonplace in the ferry sector for too long. Will it bring those responsible for this scandal to justice? In short, will it stop another P&O?”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This House agreed last March that the action taken by P&O Ferries was a national scandal. As the Minister said, 800 British workers were sacked with no notice. It was the reality of a business model that has been allowed to prevail on our seas for far too long—a business model predicated and dependent on exploitation. As the Minister knows, Labour supports the Bill’s limited provisions, and we welcome the steps that the Government have taken to improve it in Committee. I know that the Minister has been listening and I thank him for the work he has done on strengthening the amendments that we called for in Committee.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful for that intervention. I accept that the scope of the Bill is limited, but it was introduced as an opportunity to address the issues that were highlighted so egregiously in the case of P&O Ferries, so it is a major missed opportunity for the Government not to at least have published it alongside the Bill. In closing, Britain is a proud seafaring nation. That tradition has been the envy of the world. The ongoing exploitation of these workers on these routes—all too often by entities allowed to be flagged elsewhere—is a stain on that tradition. With this Bill, we have moved a small step forward, which we welcome, but regrettably the chance to end that exploitation once and for all has today been missed.”
House of Commons7 February 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In March 2021, in the middle of the pandemic, the previous Secretary of State promised buses so frequent that people would not need a timetable and said that the Government would “not only stop the decline”— in bus services, but— “reverse it”. —[ Official Report , 15 March 2021; Vol. 691, c. 50.] Since then, have bus services increased or decreased?”
House of Commons19 January 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I repeat that that promise was made in the middle of the pandemic. Only once before on record, also under a Conservative Government, have bus numbers fallen by as much as they did last year. So instead of continuing to defend this broken bus system, will the Minister extend franchising powers nationwide, remove the hurdles that operators use to block reform and finally put power and control over routes and fares into the hands of the communities who depend on them?”
House of Commons19 January 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister must surely agree that this is simply not good enough. In November, he assured us that the new timetable would be deliverable. This week, the results are in and the service has never been worse. This morning alone, at least 123 services have been cancelled or disrupted on TransPennine Express. He cannot pretend that the management are blameless in this farce. The north cannot afford to continue like this any longer, so will he strip TransPennine Express of its contract and bring it under the operator of last resort?”
House of Commons19 January 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With this Bill, we have the chance to drive out these exploitative practices for good, and ensure that another P&O can never happen. That is why Labour supports it today, but will seek to work with the Government to strengthen it in Committee, and ensure that never again can we allow such exploitation to go unchecked on our seas.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The industry has already learnt from painful experience about the danger of this kind of exploitation, and of seafarer fatigue. The Herald of Free Enterprise disaster 35 years ago claimed the lives of 193 crew and passengers, but the Bill does nothing to address these dangerous and exploitative crewing and rostering practices. That is why we must see a legally binding seafarers’ charter on the face of the Bill—one that ends the race to the bottom from which P&O Ferries has benefited; one that smashes the business model dependent on the manipulation of vulnerable workers from around the world. We are a proud seafaring nation. That tradition has been the envy of the world, but the ongoing exploitation of seafarers is a stain on it.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Baroness Vere of Norbiton, the Minister in the other place, said that the Government would act on that wider exploitation only “where it is proven that it is appropriate to do so.” Let me briefly give the House an illustrative example of why that is so important. An agency worker can be contracted on the Dover-Calais service at the shamefully low rate of £4.75 an hour. As is common in the industry, they could be expected to work up to 91 hours a week, on board, full time, for 17 weeks at a time—not entitled to any pension; not entitled to the minimum wage or any sick pay when outside UK waters. I ask Members to imagine a season of winter storms in the Irish sea or the North Sea, where sleep is almost impossible, and to imagine spending up to 17 weeks on board, responsible for the safety of passengers and that vessel.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is utterly perverse, and the Government must think again. I note that the Secretary of State said he would retain powers to decide which ports would enforce fines, but he must set a national tariff for surcharges and designate a Government agency for collecting them. The P&O scandal was supposed to represent a line in the sand for seafarers’ rights. The Secretary of State’s predecessor was clear about this, saying that the Government would work with “unions and operators to agree common levels of seafarer protection on…routes.” —[ Official Report , 30 March 2022; Vol. 711, c. 841.] Seafarers’ exploitation is every bit as much about conditions as it is about pay.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That period must be reduced. The initial drafting specified 52 visits a year. There is also the issue of enforcement. In his nine-point plan, the now Business Secretary pledged to involve His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs in ensuring compliance with minimum wage legislation, but the Bill does not include a direct role for HMRC, the only expert in minimum wage compliance; and there is no clearly defined minimum fine for breaching the Bill’s provisions. That brings me to the role of the port operators themselves, which was mentioned in earlier interventions. This is, perhaps, the most troubling aspect of the Bill. Many operators do not just run the ferry services, but operate ports as well. P&O itself operates a port. The Government are potentially asking operators such as P&O to fine themselves.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We do, of course, welcome the intention to ensure that operators pay a national minimum wage equivalent to those who have a close working relationship with the UK, but, as we have heard, significant elements of these provisions and their enforcement must be strengthened to prevent avoidance, which we know is rife in this sector. First, the minimum wage provision has an offset allowing employers to deduct costs of providing accommodation. That is clearly ripe for abuse, and must be explicitly ruled out. Then there is the issue of “port hopping”. As the Bill stands, operators fall within the scope of the Bill if they call at a single UK port on at least 120 days within a year. In the case of some routes, such as that of the Pride of Hull, only slight adjustments to their timetable would allow them to escape paying the minimum wage.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“840.] So why does the Bill contain nothing about notification of flagged vessels, or increased sanctions for those who fail to consult ahead of redundancy? The only way to prevent this from happening again is to hike up the damages that can be paid at tribunals, and/or to slap criminal liability on those who break the law in the same way as Peter Hebblethwaite, who bragged about it. Why have the Government shied away from taking the action that is so clearly needed—and why, six months on, have they still not published even a draft of their promised strengthened code on fire and rehire? It was due for consultation in the summer, but it has still not been published. Even the very little that the Government promised in the wake of this scandal has fallen by the wayside. Let me now turn to the provisions of this limited Bill.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If P&O Ferries or any of its low-cost rivals wanted to do all this again, nothing in the Bill or anything else that the Government have put forward would stop them. P&O Ferries decided not to notify either the Secretary of State or the competent authorities of the flag states of Cyprus, Bahamas or Bermuda of its dismissal plans—a legal requirement under sections 193 and 193A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992—and refused to consult the workforce ahead of their dismissal. The Secretary of State’s predecessor said: “where new laws are needed, we will create them…where legal loopholes are cynically exploited, we will close them, and…where employment rights are too weak, we will strengthen them.” —[ Official Report , 30 March 2022; Vol. 711, c.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There has been no action against any of the directors responsible. Every day that Peter Hebblethwaite remains in charge of P&O Ferries, other employers who wish to undermine the rights of British workers will find comfort. He is unfit to lead a British company, and he should be disqualified as a director. I will be grateful if the Minister who winds up the debate tells us whether he agrees with that, and why it is that six months on, the Insolvency Service is still considering his case when the evidence could not be clearer. He bragged about it to a parliamentary Select Committee! Will the Minister bring that case to a conclusion, and use his own powers under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 to finally bring this individual to justice? The fundamental point, however, is this.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He even demanded that P&O rename its ships, stating that it was completely wrong for them to sail under names such as Spirit of Britain and Pride of Kent. Six months on, however, that chief executive and those who deliberately broke the law in plain sight have faced no consequences whatsoever, and, as far as I am aware, their ships are still happily sailing under those names. Workers across the country may well be looking to this Government and asking what exactly is the point of them if they can let P&O get away with all this—because Peter Hebblethwaite has been rewarded with a promotion to another directorship within the company. There has been no criminal prosecution as was promised: the Insolvency Service refused to take forward a prosecution, and chose not to consider the public interest test in doing so.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It should be a badge of shame for this country that P&O Ferries and DP World did what they did precisely because they thought they could get away with it. They knew they could exploit our weak employment laws. They made the calculation that it would be cheaper and easier to pay off those workers because this Government would not hold them accountable. Despite all the Government’s promises, despite all their outrage, P&O’s central calculation was correct, was it not? Earlier this year the then Prime Minister himself said that P&O Ferries would face criminal sanctions. The then Transport Secretary said that it would be placed under criminal investigation. He demanded that the boss, Peter Hebblethwaite, stand down.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That was the human face of P&O’s criminal act. It was the reality of a business model that has been allowed to prevail for far too long on our seas—a business model predicated and dependent on exploitation. As the Secretary of State knows, Labour supports the provisions in the Bill, but, as we have already heard, it is wholly insufficient. Its test must be whether it will end those exploitative practices that have become commonplace in our maritime sector. Will those responsible for the P&O scandal be brought to justice? Will the Bill stop another P&O scandal? I ask because six months on, this Dubai-owned company, which received millions in taxpayers’ money during the pandemic and which tore up the rights of British workers and bragged about it to Parliament, has continued business as usual.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I wish you, the whole House and the staff of the House a very happy Christmas, Mr Deputy Speaker? Earlier this year, this House stood completely united against the action taken by P&O Ferries. There was total consensus that that criminal act was a national scandal. Some 800 British workers were sacked with no notice—nearly 800 livelihoods were lost because a rogue company made a calculation that it was cheaper to break the law than abide by it. At the time, I stood side by side with many of the sacked crew in Dover. A married couple who had been employees of P&O Ferries for 14 years spoke to me about the reward for their years of loyal service: summary dismissal via a pre-recorded video message, being marched by private security guards off the ships they lived and worked on, and being treated like criminals.”
House of Commons19 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(Urgent Question): To ask the Rail Minister if he will make a statement on rail cancellations and services, in particular across the north and nationwide.”
House of Commons1 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yesterday, it was revealed that they signed off a decision for Avanti to hand over £12 million in taxpayers’ cash as dividends to its shareholders. Enough is enough. We cannot continue like this. It is time for Ministers to take action. Will they put operators on a binding remedial plan to fully restore services or face penalties and withdrawal of the contract? Will they claw back the taxpayers’ money that Ministers have allowed to flow out in dividends? Can the Minister confirm whether the Secretary of State is preventing an offer on rest day working between operators and unions? Enough is enough. We cannot continue like this.”
House of Commons1 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Instead, they have—not just for weeks, but for months and years—forced the north to settle for a sub-standard service and to accept delays, cancellations and overcrowding. Not only did Ministers allow that, but they actually rewarded the abject failure of the operators. Six years ago, TransPennine Express had exactly the same issues it faces today. Then, as now, it blamed staff shortages and rest day working. It said six years ago that it would recruit drivers and improve resilience, but here we are again, in crisis—and the public are paying the price. Have the Government sanctioned operators or demanded improvement? No. They continue to reward failing operators such as Avanti West Coast by extending their contracts.”
House of Commons1 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and Mr Speaker for granting this important urgent question. Rail services across the north are once again in meltdown. Today, almost 40 services have been cancelled on TransPennine Express alone—and those are just the published figures, because they were cancelled overnight. People are cut off from jobs and opportunities, investors I spoke to this morning in Manchester are thinking twice about investing in the north, and businesses are unable to recruit because their potential employees simply cannot rely on the train to get to work. The damage that this fiasco is doing is enormous, and in just 11 days, major timetable changes are due to come into force. I do not say it lightly, but if this were happening elsewhere in the country, the Government would have taken far greater action by now.”
House of Commons1 December 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I warmly welcome the new Secretary of State and the entire ministerial team—and in particular the former Chair of the Transport Committee, the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Huw Merriman), who I am sure will bring his expertise and experience to the team. Of course, the problem for him and the benefit for the Opposition is that we know what he really thinks. [ Laughter. ] Has he managed to persuade the Secretary of State that the integrated rail plan under-serves the needs of the north and lets down those who require change the most?”
House of Commons24 November 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for that gentle reminder. He knows full well that that was not what was promised to the north and the midlands no fewer than 60 times and in successive Conservative manifestos. Not only are the north and the midlands not getting the infrastructure that they require, but rail services across the country are in freefall, experiencing record cancellations on top of fewer services than at any time since records began. One couple wrote to me this week and said they felt in danger from overcrowding and began to understand how real tragedies could occur. Will the rail Minister apologise for his predecessor’s signing off the decision to slash tens of thousands of services every month and confirm when those services will be restored?”
House of Commons24 November 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As we have heard in concerns raised by Members on both sides of the House, a crisis facing millions of people across the country right now is the total absence of reliable and affordable bus services. How much of the promised bus service improvement funding has actually been handed to local authorities? When will the Secretary of State reopen applications to cover the 60% of the country that did not get a single penny in the initial round?”
House of Commons24 November 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If she continues to refuse, will the Minister lay out what powers exist anywhere else that could keep the airport running? As we await the third Prime Minister in seven weeks, there is less than a week left to save the airport. If the Government do not take the action that the people of South Yorkshire desperately need them to take, the people will conclude that this is final proof that the Tories’ levelling-up agenda is dead.”
House of Commons24 October 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is willing to let the airport close, to let infrastructure be degraded and to remove any chance of its being reopened in future. The case for action from the Government is crystal clear. The use of emergency powers under the Civil Contingencies Act is the only possible measure to keep the airport running. Potential investors have made it clear that the Secretary of State’s refusal to use those powers is creating far greater uncertainty and instability, and is making purchase at any point in future even more unlikely. Can the Minister outline precisely why the Secretary of State has refused to consider the use of the Act? That decision is political, so it is beholden on her to explain to the people of South Yorkshire why she refuses to use it.”
House of Commons24 October 2022Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗