Commons Chamber

Wednesday 4th June 2025

(began 2 months ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
None Portrait Q1. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of not issuing new North Sea oil and gas licences on levels of economic growth in Scotland. (904317)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.
11:34
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:40
None Portrait Q2. What discussions he has had with the Scottish Government on priorities for the National Wealth Fund's strategic partnership with the Glasgow City Region. (904318)
-

GB Energy, £600 million of investment for infrastructure. Things are starting to happen and we must make sure we have cross-party support to get it happening. support to get it happening.
11:40
Kirsty McNeill Portrait Kirsty McNeill MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Midlothian, Labour )
-
-
The National Wealth Fund made its first Scottish investment in the Glasgow City Region, one of four ideas selected for the National Wealth Fund to unlock investment opportunities and the Secretary of State will meet with the deputy minister to discuss economic growth, the number one priority of this the number one priority of this government. I thank the Minister for her reply. Would she agreed in recent years we have seen Taylor policies for underserved communities but in Scotland devolution has but in Scotland devolution has stalled in Hollywood with a lack of willingness to pass powers down to willingness to pass powers down to towns and cities.

Does she agree towns and cities. Does she agree this makes a compelling case? this makes a compelling case? The SNP seems determined to keep power for themselves rather than passive to communities and there is no better example than the Labour- run council and South Lanarkshire which proposes £8 million and then the SNP have voted against it and that is why voters in Hamilton will vote for a real local champion, the Labour candidate Davie Wilson, Labour candidate Davie Wilson, Labour candidate Davie Wilson, With your permission, I will answer questions three and 12 together.

I start by thanking veterans for their service and families for their sacrifice. It is Volunteers Week so I place on record my thanks to the volunteers who do so much for military charities. I welcome the announcement of Valour which is giving veterans easier access to care and support. We are ensuring veterans and their families have sufficient access to health, have sufficient access to health, housing, employment, other forms of support.
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:48
None Portrait Q4. What discussions he has had with the Scottish Government on support for the higher education sector in Scotland. (904320)
-

to deal with. We said at the time it was a difficult decision we did not want to make. Now we are pleased to be in a position where we can be consider it.
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:01
12:01
12:01
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:07
12:08
12:10
12:10
12:11
12:13
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:38
12:39
12:40
12:40
12:41
Darren Jones Portrait Rt Hon Darren Jones MP, The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Bristol North West, Labour)
-
-
With your permission, I would like to update the House on government work to boost growth across the UK. I see Prime Minister set out in the plan for change, economic growth is a number-one mission of the government and it is key to delivering on goals with higher wages for working people, economic and national security, and investing in public services. We are already making progress. The most recent figures have shown that the UK was the fastest growing economy of any G7 country in the first quarter of the year and Real Betis have risen more since July 2024 than over the first 10 years of the previous Conservative government.

We previous Conservative government. We are aware that the progress must be widely felt in every part of the country. As such, plans for regional growth will be hardwired and there will be a strategy set out in more detail in coming weeks. The investment will be targeted squarely at renewal and fixed on priorities of working people, delivering on the of working people, delivering on the promise of change and improving lives in committees across the country. This morning, the Chancellor set out the next steps for nationwide growth in a series of speeches across the North and Midlands and I will update the House on the announcements now.

A key part of the growth mission is the view that growth relies on dynamic, interconnected city regions and creates clusters of activity where people can get around and find good work and the wages can flow back into strong local economies. As most members now, the majority of the regions have poor public transport networks which hold back growth by making it harder to make it get a run. This will create opportunities for individuals to access jobs and for employers to access a wider labour market.

If we were to increase the productivity of the largest regions outside London to match the national average, it will grow the economy by £86 billion. I am pleased to say that this government is making the biggest investment in transport connectivity that the country has ever seen. The spending review will allocate funding for ambitious local transport programs across England including new Transport for City Fund launched today. It will give Fund launched today. It will give Running until 2032 and the benefits and opportunities will be felt in towns and cities across combined authorities and by those who commute to work from outside city regions.

The previous government said that they would do some of their spot, as is always the case, the did not put the money aside to pay for it. As a result of our reforms to fiscal rules and decisions to increase investment at the Autumn Budget 2024, this government is delivering. The funding amounts will mean the Mayor of West Yorkshire can commit to delivering a transport system which will be fully integrated with cycling, walking, bus and rail, making journeys more accessible across the region.

The Mayor of the West Midlands can extend the Metro from Birmingham city centre to the new sports quarter, unlocking private investment and opportunities to those living in the constituency of my right honourable friend and all of those who travel there. It will mean the mere of a Manchester can. -- Mayort. It will drive up living standards and for others in living standards and for others in the north-west region. The Mayor in Liverpool can deliver bus routes linking up the city centre, John Lennon Airport the new Everton stadium, and new homes built at the Central Box redevelopment and Anfield.

And in the north-east, they can extend the Metro, linking Washington with Newcastle and Sunderland and connecting the constituency to new jobs and opportunities. And I pay particular tribute to the honourable member for Washington and get set south whose campaign for this for years and years, now delivered by a Labour years, now delivered by a Labour Can we knew the publicly owned Supertramp network with track replacements, overhead line maintenance, rolling stock mineral and a fleet of new vehicles by 2032, thinking jobs and homes in Sheffield and Rotherham.

We are backing the Mayor of West of England's plans for development across the region, improved rail infrastructure to unlock more services around Bristol, shorter journey times to Bristol Temple Meads around the wider area. Ground providing greater needs for my honourable friend's constituency and my own. After years of the Mayor of Tees Valley trying to persuade his Conservative colleagues to fund these important projects, I'm delighted to confirm today that this Labour government is now backing the region to invest in, for example, the Middlesbrough station, unblocking local networks and increasing capacity on local lines.

Can I pay thanks to my honourable friend in the Teesside region you have lobbied hard to see the investment in the region now being delivered by a Labour government. And the Mayor of the East Midlands can now forge the Trent arc, linking Derby and Nottingham to create tens of thousands of new jobs and homes, connecting Infinity Park Investment Zone and the East Midlands freeport, with clean and manufacturing and East Midlands Park, home of Toyota in their region along the Trent arc corridor.

This funding is substantial, marking a 2.4 times real terms increase in spending on city region connectivity, funding the priorities that matter to hard- working people living across the country. These announcements were only made possible today, because at the Autumn Budget in 2024 the Chancellor took the necessary action to reform the fiscal rules to improve stability after years of chaos from the party opposite and to unlock investment. This means the government can provide greater investment in Britain's economic revival, for the first time this Treasury takes account of the value Treasury takes account of the value of financial assets are not just the cost of investment.

This has enabled us to increase investment by £113 billion more than the last Conservative government, while keeping debt on a sustainable path. Made possible by the credibility of our fiscal rules that allows day- to-day spending to be funded by revenue. It is more important than ever to have a robust fiscal framework. The OBR confirmed at the Spring Statement that the government will meet its stability and investment goals two years ahead of schedule. In addition to her announcement on transport city investments, the Chancellor will set out further detail at the further Spending Review.

In January, the Of the Green Book, trading investments, we have consulted with stakeholders across the country, considering potential problems with Green Book guidance itself and how guidance is being applied in practice. Can I pay thanks contribute to many honourable members across the House on engaging in this important issue. We will publish the full conclusions of the review next week. It will mark a new approach to government decision- making, one which puts the end two sided Whitehall thinking and takes account of the reinforcing economic effects of infrastructure, housing skills and jobs to make sure infrastructure takes place in every part of the country.

These announcements reflect a fraction of our plans to supercharge growth across the UK. We are focused on investing across all parts of the country, dubious prosperity and deliver the change the British people voted for in last year's election and there is more to come. The Spending Review which we will publish next week will set out in further detail how an active government will continue to deliver growth, empowering all regions and nations of the UK to reach their full potential and making working people across the country better off, no matter where they choose to live and work.

Unlike the Conservative Party opposite, he will tell you they would have delivered on their false promises after 14 years of failing to do so, this Labour government in its first year in office is delivering, country people will see is being settled for success and they can take part in. That is the change we promised and is the change this Labour government is delivering. I commend the statement to the House.
12:51
Richard Fuller Portrait Richard Fuller MP (North Bedfordshire, Conservative)
-
-
I think you missed the railway

**** Possible New Speaker ****

station out of your statement. Can I thank the Chief Secretary

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank the Chief Secretary of the Treasury for his statement and early sight of it. And to start with our agreement, shared ambition to enable all parts of this country to participate in the growth and future, potential in the United Kingdom is everywhere and it is Kingdom is everywhere and it is right that the government seeks to unlock that potential with every unlock that potential with every means it can. That was one of the guiding principles of the 2019 to 2024 Conservative administration with levelling up.

They always say that imitation is the sincerest form that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We know that the Chancellor has a reputation for Chancellor has a reputation for copying. I thought I would have a look at the statement made in 2023, which I'm sure that Chief Secretary has seen, of allocations for Network North allocations. I thought I would compare them with today's government announcements. These were the conservative announcements and these were the Labour announcements. They can shout all they want, here we go.

2023, conservative promise for West Midlands 2.64 billion... I say to members opposite the Chief Secretary... 2.4 billion for West Midlands, 2.14 West Yorkshire, 2.1 today, 2.5 Greater Manchester, 2.5 today, 2.5 Greater Manchester, 2.5 today. 1.45 in 2023, 1.5 today. 1.5814 Liverpool, 1.6 today. 1.84 for the north-east, 1.8 today. 0.752 in 2023 for the West Midlands, 0.8 today. 970 million for the Tees Valley in 2023, 1 billion from Labour today. The truth is, I know the Chief Secretary is occasionally good with numbers, but does he not agree that essentially what he's announcing today is nothing more than a rounding error on the Conservative plans for 2023? The only difference between 2023 and 2025 announcements is that in our announcements, we would have spelt the town of Rotherham correctly? The Chancellor will go around the country rewriting history as frequently as she rewrites her CV, but no one believes in her 22 billion black hole.

What they do believe is that this Chancellor is open to change. She is going to roll back the issues on Winter Fuel Allowance. She is going to rollback her botched welfare reform. She is going to rollback changes in the two child policy. Look at the Treasury Front Bench, they have not got a spine. If you have got an issue in your constituency and you think you want to stand up for your constituents, make a bid for this Chief Secretary because he will back down and give you the money.

That is what we know from Labour. We also know that in the analysis the government is taking about the Green Book, what they are looking to do is change the assessments of a cost benefit analysis. My question to the Chief Secretary is, I do have a number of questions. Will he publish the benefit-cost ratio's for each of the projects he announced today? Will he state whether these have been evaluated on the existing Green Book rules or on the new Green Book rules? Will he today give an indicator of what those rules might be? Can he indicate, as the Labour government tries to decide whether the commitment is to two percent of GDP for the, 2.5 percent, or 3.5 percent -- GDP for defence.

Those investments rushing to the next period of government, can he confirm that the investments today will be secure no matter the changes in expenditure? He said he has been able to do this because they change the rules with investment. You can only afford the additional investment if people are prepared to fund it. There are two people who fund it, taxpayers or the bond market. Can the Chief Secretary advise whether he is going to look for additional funding from taxes or whether he is looking for additional borrowing if there is a shortfall? The truth is, despite what the backbenchers say, this Labour Treasury team is out of its depth.

It is addicted to tax increases, it is addicted to more borrowing. They Chief Secretary can publish as many press releases as he likes but we know that because of the reckless mismanagement of the economy, come the autumn, this Labour government will be back for more.
12:56
Darren Jones Portrait Rt Hon Darren Jones MP, The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Bristol North West, Labour)
-
-
I always enjoy our exchanges. To seek the shadow Chief Secretary in his place today. Can I also support that he welcomes our plans and sees that he welcomes our plans and sees the good value in them. He asked me one particular question and I will answer the rest of them, the Green Book details, or will be published next week at the Spending Review. The shadow Chief Secretary also said we were imitating the Conservative Party's promised to level up the country.

I think the British people voted and gave a verdict on their success in delivering that at the last election. There version was a set of false promises, this Labour government is delivering real change. The shadow Chief Secretary is, how we fund these announcements today? I explained that it is because of the decisions the Chancellor took to amend fiscal rules and invest in Britain rather than continuing with decline that we have been able to do so. The shadow secretary and the Conservative Party have not said how they would do so.

They were against the fiscal rules, against increasing taxes on the wealthy at their budget. They were against every measure we have taken, with the Conservative Party, the Reform party or any other party, they need to recognise their false promises have led to their decline. Unfunded promises is disrespect for to the British people. This Labour government promised change at the election, we are delivering it, these are fully funded promises unlike those of the party opposite that posed a risk to the economy and the family finances and the sooner they learn from their lessons and apologise to the British people and come forward with serious proposals, the better for the debate in this House.

House.
12:58
12:59
13:00
Daisy Cooper Portrait Daisy Cooper MP (St Albans, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
We Liberal Democrats believe that when the economy is growing, every nation, every region and every person should feel and see the benefits. We are pleased to see investment in public transport and infrastructure. I have to ask the Minister, where's the plan and the money for rural areas? The Minister will remember that at the Budget we did support and welcome the government's changes in the fiscal rules that allow for more productive borrowing and investment. We are delighted to see one of the beneficiaries of the announcement today is the Metrolink to Stockport which is a testimony to the campaigning of Liberal Democrats who have been campaigning on this for far longer than the mayoral combined authority existed.

From structure to the south-west, from Cumbria to Cornwall, from Norfolk to Newton Abbot, rural areas feel again like they have been forgotten. Will the government bring forward a rural growth strategy? I also asked the Minister about Wales? We note that in Wales, HS2 and the Oxford- Cambridge Arc line have been dedicated England Wales lines as opposed to England only. Could you explain why it is that that has happened and why they are set to lose out on Barnett consequentials? And there is one big missing piece of the puzzle.

Many of us want to see investment in infrastructure, but if we want to build stuff, we need skilled people to build it. Can I ask the Minister will the government fix the apprenticeship levy so it can be spent on skills and training? When will they introduce the skills strategy? Why has Skills England been set up as an executive agency of the DfE rather than employers at its heart as promised, and why is the government scrapping the level seven apprenticeship when it support social mobility, including into engineering? We welcome the investment but the transport infrastructure will not build itself.

We need the people skill to itself. We need the people skill to
13:02
13:02
13:03
13:04
13:04
13:05
13:05
13:06
13:06
13:07
13:08
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:13
13:14
13:15
Darren Jones Portrait Rt Hon Darren Jones MP, The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Bristol North West, Labour)
-
-
Can I thank him for his question and campaigning over many years. As the Chancellor set out today in a speech in relation to the funding for city region's, we are purposefully tilting funding towards the North and Midlands after many years of losing out in those areas and a tendency for money to come more into London and the south-east, London and the south-east are some important that we recognise the historic injustice of the distribution of investment in the country, whether the East Midlands, south-west of the North.

That is why the announcement today is important. I understand from the mayor that work will begin on the project site today, with ambition for the first services to be available from the 2030s. I welcome the news about Metrolink coming to Stockport. This Metrolink coming to Stockport. This is a tribute to residents, businesses and organisations who fought tirelessly to get these results. Can I thank the former leader of Stockport Council and MP leader of Stockport Council and MP for Cheadle who made it is life's work to get this today.

We are work to get this today. We are expecting a train station in Cheadle which will be adapted for the Metrolink. Can the Minister confirmed that when the Metrolink confirmed that when the Metrolink comes to Stockport it will come through Cheadle as well? One of the many benefits of the funding announced today for city region's is the positive effect it will have four communities along these transport lines and people who travel in and out of the city regions. This may be funding for transport in particular places but I help the -- hope their benefit will be felt widely.

It will be for the mayor to decide the programming and delivery but I think he makes a strong case for Cheadle and I'm sure strong case for Cheadle and I'm sure he can raise that with the mayor in due course.
13:17
13:18
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:25
13:25
13:26
13:27
13:27
13:28
13:29
13:29
13:29
13:30
13:30
13:31
13:32
13:32
13:32
13:33
13:34
13:35
13:35
13:36
13:37
13:37
13:38
13:39
13:40
13:40
13:41
13:41
13:42
13:42
13:43
13:43
13:45
13:45
13:46
13:47
13:48
13:48
13:49
13:49
13:50
13:51
13:52
13:52
13:53
13:53
13:54
13:54
13:55
13:56
13:56
13:57
13:57
13:58
13:59
13:59
14:00
14:01
14:01
14:01
14:02
14:03
14:04
14:04
14:05
14:05
14:06
14:07
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
will give it a few moments for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister Hamish Faulkner.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister Hamish Faulkner. We are appalled by repeated reports of mass casualties reports of mass casualties instruments -- mass casualties when instruments -- mass casualties when Palestinians have been killed trying to access a site in Gaza. Desperate to access a site in Gaza. Desperate civilians who have endured 20 months of war should never face the risk of death or injury to simply feed death or injury to simply feed themselves and their families. There has been an investigation into these events and for perpetrators to be events and for perpetrators to be held to account.

It is deeply disturbing that these incidents happened near the humanitarian happened near the humanitarian foundation distribution site. They highlight the utterly desperate highlight the utterly desperate plead to get keyed in. The Israeli government says it has opened up paid access with the new system but the warnings raised by the United Kingdom, the United Nations, aid partners and the International committee about these operations have materialised and the results are adamant. Israel's new measures for each delivery are inhumane, they foster desperation and endanger civilians.

Israel's unjustified block on aid into Gaza needs to end, it is inhumane, Israel must immediately allow the United Nations and aid partners to safely deliver all types of aid, at scale, to save the lives, reduce suffering and maintain dignity. It must ensure food and other critical supplies can reach people safely where they are, across the whole of the Gaza Strip. Civilians, medical and humanitarian workers and facilities must be protected. We will continue to be steadfast in our support for the UN and other trusted NGOs as the most effective and principal partners for aid delivery.

Our support has meant over 465,000 people have received essential healthcare, 640,000 have received food and 27,000... 205,000 have improved access to water, sanitation and hygiene services. Just two weeks ago, my honourable friend, Minister for Development, announced £4 million of additional funding for the Red Cross, enabling the delivery of relief in Gaza through their partner, the Palestinian Red Crescent, was part of the £101 million of support for this financial year. Aid must be allowed in so that this support can continue.

Today, the UN Security Council is expected to consider a resolution for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages and the lifting of all Israeli restrictions on humanitarian aid, supporting delivery by the United Nations. We will once again use our vote in support of these goals. Following our leadership, coordinating dozens of countries to address the situation, and the joint statement by the UK, France and Canada, as well as the actions announced by my right honourable friend, the Foreign Secretary, on 20 May, we will continue to convene international partners to increase the pressure and take further steps to address the catastrophic situation on the ground.

We will continue to strongly support the effort led by the United States, Qatar and Egypt, to secure an immediate ceasefire. As per Minister has said, a ceasefire is the best way to secure the release of all remaining hostages and achieve a long-term political solution. The Israeli government's decision to expand the military operations in Gaza and restrict aid undermines all of these goals. We repeat, are at a condemnation of Hamas, are demands that it releases all hostages immediately and unconditionally.

They can have no role in the future governance of Gaza. A two-state solution is the only way to bring the long lasting peace, stability and security that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve. We welcome France and Saudi Arabia's leadership in chairing an international conference later this month. I commend this statement to the House. commend this statement to the House.
14:12
Priti Patel Portrait Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)
-
-
I call Shadow Foreign Secretary.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Minister for advanced state of the statement, the scenes in Gaza are harrowing and suffering is intolerable. The current situation that we are witnessing simply cannot continue. witnessing simply cannot continue. The level of humanitarian suffering and desperation continues to be and desperation continues to be unacceptable as children, women and families suffer whilst the lily -- desperately trying to secure food. desperately trying to secure food. These deaths and casualties, the aid distribution centre should never distribution centre should never have happened.

Can the Minister inform the House what discussions inform the House what discussions have taken place with Israel about this appalling event and the status of any investigation and what action will follow? Britain must come at will follow? Britain must come at every level, use influence to bring allies together who want peace and stability in this region, including neighbouring countries, as this current conflict is hurting civilians and now appears as if a sustainable into this conflict has ended -- moved even further away.

Are we working with Abraham Accords partners who also want peace such as Georgia, Egypt's Saudi and Qatar? Written must leverages influence to help stop the endless suffering that we are seeing, to get more aid in, see the hostages released and into this terminal situation with Hamas to achieve a proper, sustainable into the conflict. Importantly, work towards a better future for the Palestinian and Israeli people. To that end, can the Minister explain how the government plans to use the upcoming summit in New York to further these aims? On humanitarian aid, the government says it continues to call for broader access and are there practical and specific proposals for the opening of individual crossings and entry points and have these been presented directly to the government of a? The Minister will know that previously my noble friend, working with allies, secured commitments to open up the crossing and the port of Ashok to get aid into Gaza.

He will know that Israel agreed to extend the opening hours of a crossing point. We were able to achieve commitments to increase the number of trucks entering Gaza. Which naturally saw an increase in vital aid supplies, food and medical aid for Palestinians. On British aid sitting in the region, the Minister has said, in a written answer on Monday, and I quote, quantify how much aid awaiting entry into Gaza is difficult due to the complex operating environment. And limited real-time data, which we absolutely can appreciate.

But what more can he do to secure practical information as to where UK aid is, who we can work with to move aid to key locations and what more Britain can do to ensure that UK aid gets to those who are in desperate need of support. We also know that multilateral institutions such as the World Bank are working on serious plans to deal with immediate and long-term issues to support the recovery and reconstruction of the economy in Gaza and the West Bank. What is the government doing to support that work and what engagement has he had with those organisations? 58 remaining hostages still remain in captivity and are on 607 days of captivity.

At the hands of Hamas. They must be released. We are aware of initiatives put forward by the United States and the latest proposals have been rejected by Hamas. What pressure is the government exerting on Hamas to get them to reverse the opposition to these plans? On the West Bank, the government signed an MOU with EPA on government signed an MOU with EPA on 28 April, which we debated in the House, since that signing, can the Minister update House on the progress on reform and governments because it is credible governance that is needed for long-term stability.

On settlements, our position, is as it was in government. That position is well understood. Settlements are not helpful for achieving long-term peace and we urge Israel not to take steps that could make a two-state solution more difficult. And to use the legal system to clamp down on settler violence. We support a two- state solution that guarantees security and stability for both the We want a better future for the Israeli and Palestinian people. People must actively bring a long- standing perspective and influence to bear in the region with all allies.
14:17
14:17
14:18
14:19
14:20
Calum Miller Portrait Calum Miller MP (Bicester and Woodstock, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Liberal Democrats Spokesperson. I'm grateful to the Minister for advanced sight of the statement. I spoke yesterday with a British surgeon who has regularly visited Gaza to deliver emergency medical aid. He first reported cases of managers and 18 months ago and is deeply anxious about what he will find when he arrives at NASA hospital in southern Gaza later this month. People in Gaza are on the brink of starvation. Others are dying daily from gunshot wounds inflicted as the queue for food.

The situation is intolerable. And it is deliberate. The policies of Netanyahu's government have led to an indiscriminate assault on the Palestinian people. We must get the aid in. We must get the hostages out we must stop the violent forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza and in the West Bank. That is the only path back to a ceasefire. The time for timidity is over. Democrats have consistently called for the government to take firm action. It must do so today.

We called for sanctioning of the extremist ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich 18 months ago. Will the Minister finally commits to influencing this? Sure we will no longer tolerate calls for Alistair and Ian dispossession. And what the government make clear that unless the Israeli Government changes course, UK will expand sanctions to those ministers and members of the Knesset who support the continuation of the blockade and the current military action. Will the government ban export of all arms to Israel? The Minister needs to expand on what options are under consideration about getting aid into Gaza.

Last week's announcement of 22 new settlements in the West Bank, the largest expansion in years, is intolerable. The UK should have no part in this. Will ministers introduce legislation now to ban all UK trade with the illegal settlers? Will the government use the conference later this month together with allies like France, finally to recognise the state of Palestine, show beyond doubt the U.K.'s commitment to Palestinians right to self-determination and two-state solution?
14:22
14:23
14:24
14:25
14:26
14:27
14:27
14:28
14:29
14:30
14:31
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
Let me first address the question about arms more broadly and then about arms more broadly and then turn to F 35. We have taken steps to ensure that weapons directly for use ensure that weapons directly for use in Gaza has been suspended. There in Gaza has been suspended. There is... F 35 program, a provision, as outlined, for a global spares pool which we do not control the operation of. I understand the argument sometimes made in this House that, in fact, we could control the final destination of this part, that is a point we this part, that is a point we reviewed and has been debated in the courts and judgement is forthcoming, courts and judgement is forthcoming, that is a question on whether or not the destination could be determined and I'm afraid I have nothing further to add on that point.

I just want to be clear to the House, as the Minister for trade was, on Monday evening, arms and suspensions that we have done are far-reaching, there have been some reports suggesting that we have not taken far-reaching action, a naturally significant arms are still reaching the IDF, satisfactorily not true. Let's continue to be the sale of items that are controlled by the arms licensing criteria, that is because many military grade items, for example, body armour for NGOs, we still judge are appropriate to be traded with Israel because they will go to NGOs.

It is also true that we are trading components which will end up in use outside of Israel, in NATO allies Arsenal, for example, of NATO allies Arsenal, for example, of the 127... £127.5 million of export licences that have been approved, 120 million were for components for NATO allies, not Israel. There is considerable confusion about this point, I wanted to clarify. point, I wanted to clarify.
14:33
14:33
14:34
14:35
14:36
14:37
14:38
14:39
14:39
14:39
14:40
14:41
14:41
14:42
14:42
14:43
14:44
14:45
14:45
14:46
14:48
14:48
14:49
14:50
14:50
14:51
14:52
14:53
14:54
14:55
14:56
14:57
14:58
14:59
14:59
15:00
15:01
15:02
15:02
15:03
15:03
15:04
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
central kitchen. Does the government have any regard for children and Palestinian people in their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

concerns? Of course, we have regard, of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course, we have regard, of course we have concerns for course we have concerns for Palestinian people. The questions are issued in the assessment of risk are legal and compute ones. The are legal and compute ones. The reason they are completed is because the cast of international human the cast of international human Terry law ends up resting a great deal on what is on the mind of a commander when they make a decision. commander when they make a decision.

International humanitarian law is tightly constrained, it is difficult to make conclusions about what is in the mind of a commander who will not the mind of a commander who will not share that thought with you. So, that is why... That is why, when we make those determinations, we make those determinations, we consider other limbs of humanitarian law. Not because we say that in all of this kisses it was proportionate and necessary, but because where we cannot determine, you can look to other limbs of the assessment and those limbs include the obligations to provide power, aid been provided, and the treatment of detainees.

Those are easier tests to meet because they do not require knowing what is the mind of the commander.
15:05
15:05
15:07
15:07
15:07
15:08
15:08
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:12
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:22
15:22
15:23
15:23
15:24
15:24
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:26
15:27
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:37
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
Jeremy Corbyn Portrait Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP (Islington North, Independent)
-
-
Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker, I beg to move that leave be given to bring in a Bill to give permission for establishing an independent public inquiry into UK involvement in Israeli military operations in Gaza, to require the inquiry to consider any UK military economic or political cooperation with Israel since October since October 2023. Including the sale, supply or use of weapons, surveillance aircraft, and Royal Air Force bases. To provide the inquiry with the power to question ministers and officials about decisions taken in relation to UK involvement and for connected purposes.

Madame Deputy Speaker, in the aftermath of the Iraq war, several attempts were made to establish an inquiry surrounding the conduct of British military operations. The government of the day spent many years resisting those attempts and those demands for an inquiry. However, they could not prevent the inevitable. And in 2016, we have the publication of the Chilcott inquiry, which Sir John Chilcott had undertaken over several years. The report found serious failings within the British Government, which ignored the warnings of millions of ordinary people who had been protesting on the streets, against the invasion.

I was leader of the Labour Party at that time, when the report came out. And I apologised, on behalf of the Labour Party, for the catastrophic decision to go to war in Iraq. History is now repeating itself. Over the past 18 months, human beings have ensured A-level of horror and inhumanity that should haunt us all forever. Entire families wiped out, limbs strewn across the street, mothers screaming for their children, buried under the rubble. Human beings being torn to pieces, doctors performing amputations without anaesthetic.

Children picking grass and dirt from the ground, thinking they might find something edible to beat. -- Edible to eat. The survivors will face lifelong mental health consequences which will go on for generations. Home by home, hospital by hospital, generation by generation, we are not just witnessing a war, we are witnessing a genocide, this time, live streamed all over the world. Today, the death toll in Gaza Today, the death toll in Gaza exceeds 61,000. And at least 110,000 people or one in 20 of the entire population, have been severely injured.

Two Israeli officials are now wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against your manatee. Madame Deputy Speaker, Britain has played a highly influential role in Israel's military operations. First, Britain has been supplying weapons to Israel, weapons that are being used to bond the people of Palestine. This of course started with the previous Conservative government, but has continued with the current Labour government. In fact, between October and December 2024 alone, more arms export licences were granted then were approved by the previous government, for the whole of 2020 and 2023.

In a September 23, the government suspended some licences, but continued to allow supply of F 30 components to the global pool. The Foreign Secretary has accepted the fact that F-35 jets are being used in violation of international humanitarian law, yet at the same time, admits those parts going to the global supply chain. And could therefore go to Israel. They know full well the implications, by justifying the continued licensing of these parts, our government is admitting its complicity in what are quite clearly war crimes.

I find this truly astounding. The government is telling us loud and clear that its participation in this program is more important than upholding international, and the Convention on genocide. It is very simple. Until this government and the sale of weapons to Israel, with four main -- It will remain complicit in the mass murder of the Athenians in Gaza at the present time. Secondly, many of us have repeatedly been asking for the truth in the role of British military bases in Cyprus.

Since October 23, military cargo has been airlifted to Israel, this cargo has often travelled to Cyprus, from US military bases, in other parts of Europe. Meanwhile, RAF shallow aircraft -- Shadow aircraft have also been conducting nightly surveillance flights over Gaza. And when the Prime Minister visited RAF Akrotiri last December, he was Akrotiri last December, he was selling troops, the whole world and everyone back at home is relying on you, quite a bit of what goes on here cannot necessarily be talked about all the time.

We cannot necessarily tell the world what you are doing. In a recent report by the British Palestine committee, it says the UK government is engaged in Military Action Bills -- Military actions without being subject to parliamentary scrutiny as these actions implicate its institutions and officials, in the gravest breaches of international law. Mr Speaker, Madam Speaker, over the past 18 months, our questions have been met with evasion, obstruction and silence, leaving the public in the dark over the way in which the responsibilities of government have been discharged.

Transparency and accountability are the cornerstones of democracy. The public deserves to know the scale of the UK complicity in these atrocities. Any meaningful inquiry would require the cooperation of the government, both governments, the Conservative and Labour party governments, involved in decision-making processes, since October 23. The inquiry needs to ask what arms have been supplied to Israel, which of these weapons have been used in Gaza and the West Bank, is the government's position that it cannot or will not bring the F-35 program in line with the UK's legal obligations? What is RAF Akrotiri being used for? Is it being used as a roofer weapons being employed in Gaza? How many U.S.

Air Force flights have flown from RAF Akrotiri to Israel since October 23? Have Israel F-35 jets been stored and repaired at RAF bases in Akrotiri or What footage does it have from the flights? Will it release the footage? What intelligence has been passed to Israel? What legal advice like the government had on definition of genocide? Will the publishers? I would like to finish by reminding the House that in October the House that in October 2023, many others called for immediate ceasefire, the bombing to stop, the release of all hostages.

We condemned the attacks and expressed alarm over the disproportionate nature of the response. We warrant we were witnessing the total annihilation of Gaza. We pleaded for those on both sides piece. They have started to backtrack -- those on both sides for peace. If there was any integrity in this, all of those who support the operation of the military would weep for the 61,000 Palestinian lives that have been lost and the moral cowardice of politicians in this country.

Today we are teaching children about the worst war crimes in history against humanity and they are asked to reflect on how the crimes ever came about. Our future history books will report the shame those that had the opportunity to stop the carnage but failed to act to achieve it. And so, we will continue our campaign in the House and outside because we are appalled at what is happening. There are huge demonstrations in this country and the Rugby World Cup people of all ages and faiths and a wide range of political opinion.

They are united with a symbol request. We will continue to campaign for truth, accountability, and most importantly for peace and justice for the Palestinian people who've been denied that for too long. If this bill is agreed today, it will be a step forward in opening up the murky history of what has gone on with the arms sales and the complicity in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

appalling acts of genocide. The question is that the honourable member had leave to bring honourable member had leave to bring in the bill. As many as of that in the bill. As many as of that opinion, say, "Aye." To the opinion, say, "Aye." To the contrary, "No." As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye." To the contrary, "No." I will remind members that a member who opposes members that a member who opposes the motion by shouting may not vote in favour of it if there is in favour of it if there is depression.

I will give it one more go. The question is that the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as are of bring in the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye." To the contrary, "No." I think the ayes contrary, "No." I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Who will bring in the bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madame Zarah Sultana, Brian Leishman, Richard Brogan, Kim Leishman, Richard Brogan, Kim Johnson, and Davies, Brendan O'Hara, and myself.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

, Gaza (Independent Public Inquiry)

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill. Second reading, what day? July 4.
15:52
None Portrait Legislation: Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords]: Remaining stages
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

We now come to the next order of business. Any MPs not participating in the next bit of business should leave swiftly and quietly, not walking past the front bench. The clerk will proceed to read the orders of the day.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, Lords, to be considered.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill, Lords, to be considered. Will begin with clause 1 and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will begin with clause 1 and consider the rest as listed on the order paper. Thank you very much. I will speak

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. I will speak

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. I will speak briefly to the new clause 1 because this amendment seeks to establish a couple of facts but I start by couple of facts but I start by saying thank you to the Minister for his pain yesterday and the engagement he has had with me because he takes it as seriously as I do to enhance the protection of I do to enhance the protection of I do to enhance the protection of ceramics in the UK.

It is a short amendment to the bill. It will seek to ask the government to explore and consider the way in which we can protect from counterfeit production and also when you buy something that proclaims to be made in the UK, that it was in fact made in the UK. Currently, most ceramics have a stamp and if you turn over a piece of tableware in the UK it will
15:54
Gareth Snell Portrait Gareth Snell MP (Stoke-on-Trent Central, Labour )
-
-
normally say the country that made it, country of origin, and most it, country of origin, and most notably in full saying it is made in England or even better in Stoke-on- England or even better in Stoke-on- Trent, which is in Staffordshire. They have good factories in Newcastle as well. We are seeing Newcastle as well. We are seeing proliferation of companies who seek to pass off what would be material to pass off what would be material not made in the UK and is imported not made in the UK and is imported into the UK and is hand decorated and stays in the UK and the consumer and stays in the UK and the consumer is able to think that the thing they are buying is made in the UK when it are buying is made in the UK when it is not.

Many great companies in Stoke-on-Trent and if I could talk briefly to Duchess Churchill, Emma Bridgewater, companies who put 'maiden England' on the back of products because everything is moulded and fired in the UK and is a genuinely British product and there is value and we know those customers want to buy products made in the UK. want to buy products made in the UK. Some companies import from overseas and some will say the products made in China and they are very upfront about it and they do not try to confuse the consumer but are very clear about the fact it is imported from overseas.

Some companies seem to put the word 'England' on it and that is because the company is English-registered or as a historic brand which has a long affinity with Stoke-on-Trent even if the manufacturing is not done there and you can turn it over and you will see a date, normally from the 1700s or 1800s. You would be completely and utterly understood to think the product is made in England but often it is not. This amendment requires the government to investigate whether or in protecting the things made in the UK by having the country of origin stamp, specifically for ceramics and I know there is a similar amendment from the Liberal Democrats are built to do this for a host of products and I'm glad we're talking in similar language because further it is food or products not related to ceramics, something not made in the UK should say so.

My amendment looks at ceramics so I will not deviate into what I'm sure will come from the benches opposite. The other part the Minister graciously give time for both companies, specifically Chinese, who are emulating and copying the stamps and there is one from a company called Dunoon in Staffordshire and it has written on the bottom of it that it is made in the UK and has the stickers saying so and we have got copies, I have some in my office, of Chinese copies that have copied the sticker that says it is made in the UK, the backstab, and are sold online and so tracing where they come from is difficult and if you are a consumer who collects such material, you would be entitled to think you are buying something online that has the backstab and all the elements match once made in the UK and so you do not know where it is made and you do not know the glaze it is used and so you have no idea whether it meets the regulations which are required to be used and you have no idea of the quality of the clay or products which are imported into the UK from manufacturers and it will likely have that effect onto the consumer.

The amendment seeks to ask the government to consider the merits of an 'country of origin' marking scheme for ceramics and does not allow this to be brought forward and there is a rule currently waiting and this is about establishing it and there are things in the UK which we value and we know these things have that value.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to him for living way -- giving way. One of his way -- giving way. One of his comments is about pride in our people and the skill of our people and in the ceramics industry, not and in the ceramics industry, not just in Stoke-on-Trent Central but many parts of Staffordshire as well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

many parts of Staffordshire as well. As always, my friend from Newcastle is absolutely right and Newcastle is absolutely right and that point of pride we can talk about at length and we can talk about the pride we have associated with industrial heritage and the with industrial heritage and the chief executive told me that you have slipped in your veins in have slipped in your veins in Stoke-on-Trent, slip younger wet clay used for ceramics.

It's part of our heritage and part of our future and this goes into nuclear submarines and other joints and also things we need for making steel and glass and you cannot do it without ceramics and it has to be factory great to withstand the heat of the metal that only ceramic can stand up to and I know the Minister is well versed in this and we've looked at this on numerous occasions, more There is hope at the moment, but one of the things we are very keen to do is promote the people by British manufactured goods and they do so with pride and to do so in a way that issue as they are supporting jobs in those localities, where that industry is so dominant.

And again, the amendment would simply ask the government to consider what the potential merits of that would be. In my own constituency, I know that there is a pride in every piece made, in fact in some factories, the people who make it undecorated put their initials on the bottom of it, is one of the company stamp, and come and identify their own works individual shops, because their way of painting and their way of applying transfers is it then becomes a fingerprint. So, part of becomes a fingerprint.

So, part of To ensure that when we are encouraging people, as my friends from Stoke-on-Trent North and south and Newcastle, to buy British, the moorlands of course, our friend from Staffordshire Moorlands, when we are encouraging people to go out and buy British, when they buy that bit of tableware, giftware, they do out there better support industry, and turn it over and see made in Stoke- on-Trent, that they have the absolute confidence that it is made in Stoke-on-Trent. The amendment is poor probing purposes, it was to get the ministers attention, the time the city has allowed for that, Madame Deputy Speaker, I know it won't go much further than this this afternoon, but I'm wakeful to the government for their discussions with me on this, -- Grateful to the government.

I know the Minister has great consideration for the importance of place as part of the industrial strategy, and I know from my conversations, that he understands why we are pushing the ceramics very hard in Stoke-on- Trent. All I would say is, as future bills progress, we aim to bring this back in a format in other ways, because whilst this bill may not be the most appropriate place for the piece of legislation itself, there will be other opportunities that I hope when that time comes, Madame Deputy Speaker, the government may

**** Possible New Speaker ****

feel in its place supporters. -- To support us. Country of origin marking for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Country of origin marking for ceramic products assessment. The question is a new clause 1 be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

read a second time. I will begin by saying that I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will begin by saying that I agree and endorse what they honourable member for Stoke-on-Trent Central has said. I think he makes logical and coherent points. In that regard. And this is a bill that could be used as a vehicle in that could be used as a vehicle in that regard. And I would support both his regard. And I would support both his new close and new clause 4, however, there are aspects of this bill which there are aspects of this bill which I think are democratically dangerous.

Because this bill gives to government unbridled capacity to make, by regulation, with virtually no oversight from the selected house, on matters which touched not just upon the sanctity of
16:05
Jim Allister Portrait Jim Allister KC MP (North Antrim, Traditional Unionist Voice)
-
-
production, but indeed on the sovereignty of this nation. Because, sovereignty of this nation. Because, this bill made very little attempt this bill made very little attempt at subtlety, and is a vehicle which at subtlety, and is a vehicle which enables a government, if so minded, and this one I fear might be, to and this one I fear might be, to sabotage Brexit in many ways. This sabotage Brexit in many ways. This is a government, I stand to be corrected, I don't think there is a single member of this government who single member of this government who voted for Brexit.

And yet, that is voted for Brexit. And yet, that is the settled and declared well by the greatest number ever in a democratic greatest number ever in a democratic vote in this nation. And yet, within this bill, we have the capacity, to go through clause 37, to align, dynamically align, all our regulations with those of the EU. And to do that, without recourse to this House, to do it at the whim of the executive. Whatever the subject matter that she really is a most unhealthy situation.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the honourable member is making an important point and it is why I will be supporting opposition amendments in this frame today. But amendments in this frame today. But does he agree with me that there are House of Lords report, Madame Deputy House of Lords report, Madame Deputy House of Lords report, Madame Deputy This because they have brought to life just how skeletal this bill is and isn't it because of that that we should really be paying attention? should really be paying attention? We shouldn't always have to leave it to the House of Lords to do our work for us but we should be having it for us but we should be having it here, and these debates about the future should be happening here on the floor of the House, not at a later date.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

later date. Absolutely. And yes, Ms Bill in particular, the House of Lords has done some very informative useful work I only hope it is not wasted on work I only hope it is not wasted on this government. And that is my fear.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am going to agree with him. Has he had time to look at amendment 13 which would have the effect of bringing any backsliding back to bringing any backsliding back to bringing any backsliding back to this House for rent determination, before it was used by the government? Now, I expect he, like government? Now, I expect he, like me, accused ministers at the moment of being capable of abusing Henry VIII powers, but some future VIII powers, but some future And it is really for that reason we need amendment 13, particularly, to ensure that retained EU legislation, one third of which the previous government binned, canned, got rid of, doesn't start over the years, months and years, creeping back, so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

months and years, creeping back, so we are back where we began, prior to 2016, and effectively taking the public for fools. Agree absolutely. And I think no members of this House should liberally pass over close to seven -- Clause 27 of this bill, because it frantically says that regulations which can be made in the manner described, without recourse to this House, can be made to provide the product regulation is traded and met, if it meets the relevant EU regulation.

Now, that is quite a bold indisputable platform, upon which to dynamically realign it, in all those regulations, with EU regulations, to become rule takers in that regard. And that, I think, is the fundamental objection at the heart of this bill. And in this context of scrutiny, the lack of scrutiny powers of this House in this regard is made worse by the fact that we no longer have the European scrutiny committee. If and European scrutiny committee. If and when we have that committee, we waste the opportunity.

That is why I welcome a new clause 15, because new clause 15 would require the authorities of this House to explore and hopefully ultimately establish a scrutiny committee of the regulations being made. And that, surely, should be the minimum expectation of anyone democratically elected this House, that we should have the capacity to give oversight and challenge and scrutiny to laws which were made in the name of those we represent. But made exclusively we represent. But made exclusively by the executive without the requisite consent or processes of this House.

That seems to me so fundamental, that is a very sad commentary indeed on the intent behind this bill. If clause 15 is not acceptable to the government, because if it is not coming here saying it was unbridled, unchallenged, unchallengeable power, to make whatever regulations it likes, despite under the face of this House.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The government throughout this process with this piece of legislation has said it is not about legislation has said it is not about the European Union. Yet, as the honourable member makes clear, only the European Union can we specifically align with wonder regulations through this legislation. Doesn't that fundamentally undermine the entire argument made by this government and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

argument made by this government and why these amendments are so vital in order to protect this House? Absolutely. The government doesn't tell us, when we make trade doesn't tell us, when we make trade deals, we need to be able to ensure that we have the requisite alignment. But this bill provides only for alignment with the EU. Rather than a cat out of the bag, Rather than a cat out of the bag, this bill is not about facilitating international, so that we could, in international, so that we could, in the relevant circumstances, align with the United States, Japan, wherever we are making deals with.

This bill is exclusively singular focused upon alignment with the EU. That is because I suspect the purpose of this bill is to advance at the speed the government wishes without the restraint of this House, down the road of dynamic alignment. So, to me, new clause 15 is very important. Amendment 16 is a key amendment here. Because it is amendment 16 which will pull the teeth of clause 27 and protect us from the intended course of action.

So, I do very strongly support amendment 16, believing that it really would rein in powers that need to be reined in and remove the threat and indeed the allegation that this is about realignment with the EU. A couple of weeks ago, we had the reset, so called, with the EU. The reset is as nothing compared to this bill. This bill is the legislative vehicle, whereby Brexit can be sabotaged. At that is why it's important to address the core issue which lies at clause 27.

And if this bill is not about securing dynamic alignment with the EU, then there would be support for the government, amendment 25, making the reference to foreign law, not to EU law. And if it did that, then it would remove from those of us who would believe this is a subterfuge to secure realignment with the EU, it would remove that, and put to bed those concerns, but of course, the government, I fear, would not accept that amendment.

So it is, I do perceive, a Trojan bill. A bill with a very clear direction of travel. And a direction of travel determined to be secured by ignoring the scrutiny powers this House should have. And by affording to the executive and the executive alone executive and the executive alone the right at the pace and the time and the content that they, they alone, approve of, to realign this dynamically with the EU. So, I do say to this House that the bill needs those radical amendments.

That surgery that amendment 16 would provide. And at the very least, it requires is the semblance of oversight, the new clause 15 would provide. Thank you very much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It now gives me huge pleasure to call our resident metrology expert.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

call our resident metrology expert. Thank you very much indeed,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much indeed, Madame Deputy Speaker. It is once again a great honour for me to speak in debate about this bill, the Product Regulation and Metrology Product Regulation and Metrology Bill. Today, of course, we focus on Bill. Today, of course, we focus on amendments put forward following the report back from the Public Bill Committee, on which I was similarly honoured to serve as the resident pathologist. In any Bill committee, pathologist. In any Bill committee, we heard extensively from members of the opposition in particular, who described their concerns in great depth, as we have just heard from depth, as we have just heard from across the way.

Concerns about the bill's implications regarding potential international alignment of potential international alignment of regulations. Today, these concerns have once again been presented to the House, in various opposition amendments to the bill. I would like to explain it through this speech, in reference to the state of the arts in metrology, why these issues shouldn't be a significant cause for concern for honourable and right honourable members. Yes, gladly.
16:15
Adam Thompson Portrait Adam Thompson MP (Erewash, Labour)
-
-
I thank the honourable member for giving way, him and I served on a committee to get a present he missed a slightly important point of this? This is about foreign alignment, as put forward by the amendments that have been tabled by the opposition. The international alignment, it is about the alignment with the EU, which is why there is some concern from this side of the House.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member, right honourable member, my apologies, for his intervention there. I will go on to talk about some of these points throughout my speech, but as I discussed extensively through the Bill committee, I think there is a committee, I think there is a misunderstanding here are quite exactly what this bill is doing, and I sort of fundamentally disagree with the point he is making. I will with the point he is making. I will go into more detail throughout the speech.

One of the first things one learns as a budding pathologist is learns as a budding pathologist is about the concept of perfection. In his book Exactly, Simon Winchester writes what he refers to as the writes what he refers to as the perfectionists. Detailing the perfectionists. Detailing the evolution of the science of metrology through time, and how precision engineering has been used to create the modern world in which to create the modern world in which we inhabit. It is a great read, it covers the history of my science in covers the history of my science in the popular mindset.

However, I don't necessarily agree with Winchester in his core thesis. He talks about metrology as the science of perfection. Whereas I think it is more accurate to visit is not the science of the perfect, but the science of the good enough. I would like to elaborate shortly. In the early days of metrology training, we learn that with more money and time, a precision engineer can almost always achieve a more precise result. Be that a straight line, smooth the surface, or indeed a smooth the surface, or indeed a smooth the surface, or indeed a Striving for true perfection, and by that I mean the absence of any fault, as always folly.

In the real world, it is more important to strive for being good enough rather than profit because it is the core of engineering and the fulcrum on which the world balances. Many colleagues will now that I am a trained mixologist but within the trained mixologist but within the broader field I am a surface metrologist, so I am the one who decides if you are leather steering wheel feels right and I am the one who ensures your tyres keep you firmly planted on the road as you go firmly planted on the road as you go round the corner.

Becoming a surface metrologist requires becoming accustomed to the concept of perfection and I'm often asked for things to be perfect but I can put on record that there is no such thing as perfection in reality.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I know that you are all thinking I am going to say there is I am going to say there is perfection but as a mathematician would you say it is to do with the infinite, and the infinite amount of infinite, and the infinite amount of numbers between one and 0.1 or the numbers between one and 0.1 or the infinite numbers between one and 1.11.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

1.11. I must remind the House that I accept we have some experts in today accept we have some experts in today but speeches and interventions must relate to the business in hand and the amendments.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the amendments. I thank my honourable friend for the intervention. It was perfect. He is right. I leave the perfection to is right. I leave the perfection to the mathematicians. I will illustrate my point. I hear people asking for products to be met privately, angles to be exactly 90 degrees or surfaces to be infinitely smooth. This is about understanding the concept of uncertainty and applying them and so if you zoom in close enough, the angle is never quite right and in the second reading of this, I made reference to the optical mirrors which are incredibly smooth, yes, but you can find deviations that mirror those in the ground and these are within the context of what we understand in terms of improvement and there are terms of improvement and there are aerospace engines and my expertise is alongside my good friend Doctor Andy Townsend.

We made discoveries and this phenomenon is common among science and I used x-rays to measure interior surfaces and this has never previously been good enough. It is significantly behind those required to separate measurements from noise. to separate measurements from noise. They were not needed and the surface had to be accessed with a machine- tool but could also be accessed with a measuring tool and with the birth of 3D printing, we could suddenly make things that could not be measured and without measurement we cannot verify the parts and new technology was required and there are new joint replacements which are customised to suit the individual and we solve the problem by becoming good enough to measure the surfaces and this bill mirrors that.

The current legislation sees as placed at risk of falling into alignment with the rest of the world and in turn that risks our ability to maintain our position at the forefront of international sign. The bill, in the current unamended form, would grant the Secretary of State the authority to keep pace with experts and these amendments would hinder that ability and ability to stay in line with the advancement of progress.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In terms of the Henry VIII powers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In terms of the Henry VIII powers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In terms of the Henry VIII powers of the bill, this bill has been able to see criminal offences created without scrutiny no input from the without scrutiny no input from the House and people might think would be interested in protecting the liberty of those in the House but they would be jeopardised by terminal offences that only the terminal offences that only the Executive mix. Is he at ease with that?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that? I disagree with this assessment. This is about providing the Secretary of State with the Secretary of State with the necessary powers that he needs to ensure we remain at the forefront of science. Honourable members opposite science. Honourable members opposite have claimed the bill hands of authority to foreign powers or overly centralises it in the hands of the Secretary of State but this is not a matter of fact but about maintaining the UK positioning at the forefront of scientific and regulatory innovation and ensuring that British scientists that follow and the footprints of Newton and Franklin continue to lead the world.

These steam from a misunderstanding of what standard frameworks entail and I would urge all members to vote

**** Possible New Speaker ****

against these amendments. I advise members they are speaking to the amendments and there

**** Possible New Speaker ****

speaking to the amendments and there are 33. Please keep contributions appropriate. I rise to support clause 1 which

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to support clause 1 which is the country of origin marking for products which my right honourable friend for Stoke-on-Trent eloquently introduced. In my constituency, we introduced. In my constituency, we are home to the wonderful Gladstone Pottery Museum and there are many Pottery Museum and there are many firms in my constituency who have firms in my constituency who have made iconic goods and I was honoured to meet one company recently and I to meet one company recently and I met Jason since who is a visionary for the future in Stoke-on-Trent.

-- for the future in Stoke-on-Trent. -- Sims. It was an interesting visit. Duchess is founded in 1988 and produces the people we are produced -- produces the tableware used in the House of Commons. People buy products produced by them and can products produced by them and can see it says on the bottom 'fired in China, made and Staffordshire'. The freezing is deliberate and -- the Allows us to see the country of origin. Most products contain these and many include references to Stoke and Staffordshire.

As I have before, I invite all colleagues present to join the club and check the chinaware and you will probably see chinaware and you will probably see

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it is made in Stoke. I will way. An excellent point and I will say

**** Possible New Speaker ****

An excellent point and I will say

**** Possible New Speaker ****

An excellent point and I will say that some of the tableware here is in fact German. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for that timely and rightfully put intervention and join with him in intervention and join with him in his campaign. I know that it is not always the case in this country that we have that level of detail and we we have that level of detail and we must address that's all that consumers know what they are buying. This is important. The pottery industry is a great risk from cheap imports. It is undermining products made in Britain and creating unfair competition for better quality products made in our own country.

This dumping of China often with produce pretending to be from Staffordshire must be stopped. We must do what we can to resist competition that is unfair. A few months ago...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for giving way and I have tableware in Michael from Stork. Will she join me Michael from Stork. Will she join me in supporting UK labelling for manufacturers not just from Stork but further afield as well? -- Stoke.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You are right to point out that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You are right to point out that Staffordshire and Stoke are not the Staffordshire and Stoke are not the only places that produce great stuff. I am talking on the amendment about ceramics. I was proud to meet with GMP representatives for British pottery industries along with my colleagues and in Parliament I also met the formidable Sharon Yates, one of my constituents. They have real pride, passion and skills in what pride, passion and skills in what

**** Possible New Speaker ****

they do. I will happily give way. My honourable neighbour has eloquently outlined the skills and talents of our people who make talents of our people who make world-class ceramics and I thank her for her support for the new clause for her support for the new clause 1. Recently we spoke to workers who 1. Recently we spoke to workers who had sadly been redundant in my constituency. Collectively, they had constituency. Collectively, they had had over 800 years of falling skills and expertise in that room.

Does my honourable friend agree that we must honourable friend agree that we must do all we can to protect parts
16:28
16:29
Stella Creasy Portrait Ms Stella Creasy MP (Walthamstow, Labour )
-
-
knighted for his services explaining metrology to others and should perhaps have a BBC4 show, possibly with the other honourable member as his sidekick. This amendment has cross-party support and I hope the Minister is reassured about that because these are important parliamentary matters. I put that in the context of what we are talking about today because I agree with the members opposite that this is an important piece of legislation and I come at it from a different perspective and I see it from being at the sharp end of Brexit and to me Brexit is paperwork and is paperwork because it is multiple regulatory regimes and the reams of issues that have come from living in the way that we did has caused issues for small businesses in the what is impact and over 16,000 small businesses have been doing this because of all of the extra public and exporters had permanently or temporarily stop selling to the EU and many had to do so because it had and many had to do so because it had This piece of legislation will affect thousands of businesses in our constituencies because it will help to deal with the paperwork mounting that has a product itself brings it, and we can see that because it makes no sense at all to ask people to follow two sets of rules when we see that one of those sets of rules is perfectly functional.

And actually, members of the opposite benches would be honest and admit that, because their own attempts to run two consecutive regimes fell flat, so we saw that with the previous government, the UK Conformity Assessment which the government originally tried to introduce in December 2021. Because it was such a disaster and creating so much extra cost and paperwork for small businesses, it kept getting delayed, until May 2024 when the UK government finally admitted defeat, a claim that any business in the UK that had met the European Charter Mark had met the UK Charter Mark for top and the reason they did that is because it costs businesses up to £1.6 billion over the next decade, to try and run it to separate lots of Conformity Assessment's.

The very product regulations we are talking about how they should operate today. This matters very much for our constituents. It matters very much for the small businesses, and the jobs it creates. But it also matters for governments to get this right. Because businesses need certainty and stability in their regulatory regimes. And government needs to be able to be functional about how it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

does review of those. I can see the member opposite is wanting to stand up. She appreciates we're coming at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She appreciates we're coming at this from different angles, but this from different angles, but would she also agree with me that some of the amendments we have got down today, such as amendment 13, will just require the Secretary of will just require the Secretary of State to come forward so this House, and actually make a statement? Because, for exactly the point she is making about the small is making about the small businesses, seen regular to reach businesses, seen regular to reach change, so swiftly happen, magazine regulatory change so swiftly happening, they can't keep up with it.

There are other issues in this, it. There are other issues in this, the factory Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Regulations will be able to change even more quickly -- The regulations may be a quickly -- The regulations may be a change even more quickly, which Mr businesses can align even more quickly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Obviously, the member opposite at the luxury and benefit of being able to be on the committee, I did not have that ability to ask the have that ability to ask the questions he is asking. But what I do look at is the evidence under the previous ministration of when there previous ministration of when there was this ability to divert what exactly happened, and the reality is very little divergence happened. Because it is not in our national Because it is not in our national interest to do so.

We can fight many things in this place and we do, indeed in British politics, but geography really is not one of those geography really is not one of those things. It is worth our time to things. It is worth our time to argue with. When we do five times as much trade as our European Union neighbours as we do with America, neighbours as we do with America, with China and India put together, then of yesterday, it makes sense to have a regulatory regime that makes have a regulatory regime that makes that as friction free as possible and that is where this piece of legislation comes in, indeed, under the previous government, there were the previous government, there were only five cases of active divergence, the sort of changes the member opposite was worried about, that might affect small businesses.

I think that is with good reason, because actually, if you have got a sensible regulatory regime, it makes sense to be aligned at the Prime Minister has talked about this, it's also what businesses want. The engineering and machinery alliance which represents over 1,600 firms and trade negotiations because it very simply. Our businesses are trading in European markets, they are part of the European value chains, there are four European customers and suppliers. For companies operating in highly specialised high-value markets, the UK is unlikely to provide the mass needed to develop and successfully market their products.

They need to be international, that means working to international standards. The EU has been almost always the most appropriate. I will happily give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank a giving way. But she agreed the Tory reform Brexit has been a complete disaster for our economy?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

economy? I cannot even look the deputy speaker in her place because if I speaker in her place because if I was tempted into that... Very practical, what we are trying to deal with here is the fallout and he will have heard me say what we need will have heard me say what we need in this country as a salvage operation because of the damage for the way in which we left the European Union was conducted, the European Union was conducted, the consequences we have seen.

I see this piece of legislation as part of that salvage operation because we used to have the ability to write used to have the ability to write regulations and be part of writing them with our colleagues in Europe. We do not any more. But we need a process to be able to maintain them because the reality of those supply chains at the reality of how we do chains at the reality of how we do business and the reality of where divergence has hit small businesses, and it is small businesses in every single constituency who have paid the price for this version of Brexit.

I will take it as yes but no I'm sticking very closely to the amendments. Because that is what I come onto. Because how we make those decisions. We need to be clear this will affect the lives of our constituents as well, let me give an example. I am a child of the 1980s, I remember the glowworm, I am thanking the Madame Deputy Speaker for looking surprised at that, I am hoping that if a prize or she is remembering the glowworm herself. The point is, the glowworm turned out to be a dangerous toy because of the chemicals in it.

Actually, regulations are what help safe. We talk about regimes and being able to promote markets, and the glowworm has now been reissued without chemicals in it, thank goodness, so the children of 2025 can enjoy those squidgy toys. What matters here is how in a decision about the regulations, and what I would say is I think this debate, this piece of legislation heralds a bigger conversation we need to have in Parliament about how you can be involved in those discussions, now that we are not part of the European Union.

Obviously, the area of agri- food and SBS goods is not included in this bill. But the government has now committed to dynamic alignment with the EU rules, the Prime Minister has said that, for a very commonsense reason. Because we are currently aligned in our standards, but we don't get the benefit of that, we want to continue to have high standards, that's what the British public want and I hope that is the ethos we are going to take to this now, and to how we use the powers in this legislation for sub certainly what businesses would like us to be able to do.

Happily. I was about to go into new clause 15.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable lady makes an important point but on a broader issue of dynamic alignment, aren't there some issues, for example in there some issues, for example in animal welfare, I know it is not covered in this legislation, where actually, if we want to maintain a higher standard, we want to go higher standard, we want to go further than the EU, not Dana Melia

**** Possible New Speaker ****

further than the EU, not Dana Melia line with them? -- Dynamically align with them? The honourable gentleman seems to believe the relations we had a believe the relations we had a ceiling rather than a floor, there is nothing that prevents you from going higher in your standards, they going higher in your standards, they are about maintaining standards, and we are on different sides of neutrality, because of the concern of the high standard of risk of the of the high standard of risk of the previous government, when it came to protecting our rivers and seas from Aldi.

But he is right to raise the Aldi. But he is right to raise the question about how to be maintain that unless is really when you clause 15 is coming to. And that concept that was frankly a heart of all the Brexit debates, and how do we take back control. And that is why actually, I'm sure the member has surprised himself I have become the stopcock for him, that may be right at -- The stopped clock for him that may be right at this point in his political career.

Those of us who may come to the Briggs debate from different directions, greed is good and healthy to have a debate and discussion but I also want to recognise that as a parliamentarian, to say that the government should be directed to do something in Parliament has its own consequences as well. That is when you clause 15 is coming from a probing amendment to raise this concern more generally about how do we make a good legislation. At the beginning, the government decided not to re- establish the government scrutiny committee, which was to scrutinise European documents that affected UK policy or law, and in the debate, the Commons leader, the Surrey, the leader of the Commons said, the printable job a committee to examine the documents produced by the EU institutions that the government will automatically take on board is no longer required.

A challenge before many of us is that this bill, and indeed the deal we have now seen with the European Union, means that Tess is being set again. There is no need for some form of dedicated scrutiny mechanism with specialist expert staff to consider relevant EU laws and rules. That is not confined to some of the rules coming out of this bill, it is a broader point about what is happening. Using the web primarily by examining proposals from the commission, giving opinion on the regulations and whether they would affect matters of printable, policy or law in the UK.

I recognised since that committee was abolished, there has been some work done by other committees and that is very welcome on these issues for thematic what we are moving to, rightfully, with this piece of legislation, and with the reset deal happening, is a volume of European law and regulation. And technical complexity around it. Let's be honest, many of these things are things beyond our individual pay grades where we do want some expert assistance, that means it would be best served in this place by having that specialist expertise.

That put simply, if it is passed in its current form, where the government does choose to recognise even put regulations, there will be documents produced by EU institutions the government would automatically take on board. Now, it shows in the government's own analysis, the government's dashboard of assimilated EU law shows there are 155 items in the area of product safety and standards, which arrived from European law and could potentially be influenced by the proposals on the European commission to update European law.

155 documents alone would likely exceed the ability of any one individual departmental Select Committee to devote such time to that level of scrutiny, given their other priorities. Many of us had run-ins with the previous member for Stoke, for some reason, he never quite welcomes my interest in his work, but the interest in concern and scrutiny is genuine and heartfelt, because I do think, at our best, we can help ministers. I know someone at the front benches, may be on both sides, raising an eyebrow at that suggestion.

Aside from the democratic merits of parliamentary scrutiny in its own right and the cry to take back control, there are a number of benefits to the government, on ensuring that regulations devise from European laws are scrutinise closely. Not least, if those regulations derive from EU nor are related to the subject of judiciary review, the quality of parliamentary scrutiny yourself, or would be regular to the cause thinking of the adequacy of the government's decision-making. So, we may pick up things in that process that might have been missed.

It is indeed the question of perfection, that they member from Erewash said, the argument that any government, any individual scrutiny process through NSI come from Mac through NSI could ever be perfect -- Through S I could ever be perfect. I think it is always merited to have a second pair of eyes and that is what this process is getting at. That is how we get closer to perfection. If I've understood my lessons in metrology correctly. And indeed, this fits within a broader debate about as we reset our relationship with Europe, how do we make sure we show the British public our homework? Because that is ultimately what good would need us.

It defeats the naysayers that claim there is a the naysayers that claim there is a Of disaffected to be poured on every single document to its dullest degree. As the PM told the House in presenting the European deal, we will be taking cooperation with Europe further, step-by-step and alignment would be an important part of that. And I welcome that because I think that is in the interest of the British public. We are already committed to dynamic alignment under the deal, to free us from those dynamic border checks, -- Diane Bolger checks which means there are trucks stuck, and food inflation has increased and our constituents have paid the price.

We are also looking at dynamic alignments in key industry like steel, this method when those are completed, there will be much larger volumes of EU rules that directly affect UK law and policy. And that would probably be a good thing. It is a right thing for this place to be able to debate and discuss and scrutinise how that works. I hope the Minister, in responding to this, and recognising that everything a political party in this House has supported you close 15, not because they wanted to batter the government, but because they want to be able to engage with the government on these issues, will talk about how we can, in this piece of legislation, see the appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

I recognise there probably won't be very many pieces of legislation that would actually be affected by the proposals directly. But also, that broader point about how we do take back control. How we have that conversation about the way in which we, at our best, assist the government to get the best out of regulations so that our businesses can keep trading, our consumers can keep buying and our glowworms can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

keep glowing. Thank you very much, Madame

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madame Deputy Speaker. I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak very briefly in this debate this afternoon. I wasn't
16:44
Adam Jogee Portrait Adam Jogee MP (Newcastle-under-Lyme, Labour)
-
-
this debate this afternoon. I wasn't sure if I would, depending on business in the House. I have the pleasure today of welcoming Doreen to Parliament, they said about their birthdays, we send our best wishes to them. There are five MPs for North Staffordshire, we are all here, proud members of the turnover club and champions of our ceramics industry and we have all contributed to the debate, both those speaking, the comments of the site, time wafer, Madame Deputy Speaker, to you, for the guidance on the 33 amendment, and reminding us to speak

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to them. I will happily give way. I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman, they just want to make gentleman, they just want to make sure that all five members of North Staffordshire do make their voices heard on the record, and I support

**** Possible New Speaker ****

him in his speech. That is my kind of friend. Very grateful to the right honourable grateful to the right honourable lady for the intervention. She, through that individual, speak to the cross-party support for the cross-party support for ceramics, and I'm grateful for her for placing that on the record. Madame Deputy Speaker, there are two Madame Deputy Speaker, there are two elements in the Labour Party, my elements in the Labour Party, my friend from Erewash, he is older than me, but only one metrology is.

While I enjoyed his speech, I will While I enjoyed his speech, I will While I enjoyed his speech, I will not attempt to repeat it. I will test his weather standards, but in jeopardy speak I will speak briefly. I will leave it there. I will speak briefly to new clause one and my support for it, in the name of my honourable friend under the constituency for Stoke on Trent, and her honourable colleagues for Staffordshire Stoke North, Burton Stoke South, and Amber Valley.

And we had a very good speech from a friend at Stoke Central and I'm grateful to him for taking my intervention, because I focus on pride, which I will do very briefly. The ceramic industry home in Staffordshire is something that local people in Newcastle-under-Lyme and people across the county are very proud of, men and women who have shown their skill, powers, their knowledge, their talent, since the 17th century. On occasion, we hear the odd speech in this chamber which reminds you of the 17th century.

Recently I was lucky to have the opportunity to visit a place specialise in high-quality handmade ceramics, based in my The skill has been passed down for many generations and we should not be afraid to claim it, show it off, celebrate it. That is why this clause is so important. My honourable friend confirmed it was one way to get pain with the Minister which is excellent advice for a backbencher like me and so I will leave the chamber to look at some of my own measures.

Clause 1 is an amendment I hope you colleagues will disagree with and I fly the will disagree with and I fly the flag of the UK on my lapel and I want to have a detailed conversation want to have a detailed conversation and I want the same for the ceramics industry to say it has been designed and made in Staffordshire. I pay tribute to my honourable friend. The new clause speaks to the industry and we need the government to step up.

This means stepping up with actions and not words. It is good for the UK plc and the new clause is for the UK plc and the new clause is I was not on the bill committee I was not on the bill committee and my parliamentary assistant asked me to be part of that. I pay tribute to my honourable friend. Following his contribution to the second reading,
16:50
Chris Vince Portrait Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )
-
-
I did take away his slides on metrology and found them very interesting. I want to speak on a interesting. I want to speak on a number of the amendments, as is my number of the amendments, as is my role. We will touch upon the new clause 1 because I want to pay tribute to my honourable friend from tribute to my honourable friend from Stoke-on-Trent Central. Every time the ceramics industry is mentioned the ceramics industry is mentioned the ceramics industry is mentioned in the House we know it will be as in the House we know it will be as such and has passion is something that members should respect.

Those that members should respect. Those businesses were made in England are in Stoke on Trent and it is not only dishonest and we all want to support the local industry. Fibre-optic cable was in my constituency of cable was in my constituency of Harlow. This will update the product safety regulation and metrology framework and unlike some who were sceptical, if not prevent this and before not affect the amount of beer you receive is a pain in any of the pubs in Harlow.

Regulation is important and I welcome this part of the bill and I welcome the Minister for ensuring the regulation is effective and I'd be interested if the Minister could touch upon cost recovery and it's important to enforce these regulations. I will enforce these regulations. I will briefly talk about this new clause and was advocated for by my honourable friend. She said the stability is hugely important and she is right to say we do five times as much trade as any other trading partners and as I said last week, businesses in Harlow have seen a breaking down of this and I welcome your comments about the importance of scrutiny from the House.

I come to the chamber often to talk about things in my constituency and part of this, the most important roles, it is to scrutinise and he is going to intervene, isn't he? Of course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for giving way. A lot of debate today giving way. A lot of debate today and some of the amendments talk about scrutiny and it is getting about scrutiny and it is getting into the power of the House to scrutinise and small and medium- sized businesses are facing huge sized businesses are facing huge amounts of pressure with regulation and the economic climate set by the government in terms of the jobs tax and the amendments are trying to do and the amendments are trying to do this and they are trying to reign in this and they are trying to reign in some powers that the executive is taking on board and changing taking on board and changing regulations and more uncertainty for businesses and so with the honourable member agree that these amendments give more scrutiny to the House and can make things better for businesses that we want to champion.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for this intervention and we would this intervention and we would recognise the importance of this and I'm sure he would recognise these I'm sure he would recognise these

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will Will move Will move on. Will move on. I Will move on. I disagree Will move on. I disagree with Will move on. I disagree with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will move on. I disagree with the reasons for the economic challenges and I would say that these barriers and I would say that these barriers which were created can be broken down and I do not intend to rehash the same arguments we've had about Brexit and it is about working where we are at the moment and this is positive and I think it is part of the alignment and, just to finish, I welcome the response from the Minister on some points raised but I would say I have no confidence in the Secretary of State to ensure he does the best and does his best for businesses in Harlow.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a real pleasure to take
16:55
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney MP (Richmond Park, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a real pleasure to take part in this debate on product regulation and metrology, not least because it gives me the opportunity because it gives me the opportunity to highlight work done by former colleagues and my constituency is the UK's home of metrology. The honourable gentleman is still the only metrologist I have known and as a nonscientist, there is real admiration and there are standards maintaining the measurements and what I would like to say to the chamber is if they have been inspired by this member or had a fire ignited in them then they are having an open day on Friday.

I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the honourable Lily for giving way and I recall when she was first elected how when she was first elected how excited my field was at the time and I would like to place on record how I would like to place on record how much I agree with the excellent contributions to science.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Following on from that hymn of praise, now the amendments, the Liberal Democrats welcomed the measures and we must ensure UK laws measures and we must ensure UK laws can keep up with enhancements and we have those products which pose a safety risk to consumers and the importance of corporate responsibility for businesses operating in the online marketplaces. The liberal democrats support the need to update the regular 33 and were glad the bill is taking steps to address this and we also believe there must be steps taken to level the playing field between online businesses and we have people to new clause is which work towards this aim and equally the Liberal Democrats are concerned and there is the overuse of the powers and there is the chance to have primary regulations and we believe they should be subject to the procedure and we seek to ensure the bill is ambitious in providing proper scrutiny and also believe there should be greater engagement and consultation requirements being key stakeholders may not be adequately consulted.

There is a burden placed on some businesses and we have tabled the amendment and would provide this support. I wish to speak in favour of the new clause and it is a requirement on these and it has decreased in terms of measurement and there are products like digestive biscuits which have got 20% smaller and yet the price has risen by 65% compared to 10 years ago. It is outrageous. And to quote the honourable gentlemen, quote the honourable gentlemen, there have been similar amendments and were glad there was an amendment accepted proposing changes to the accepted proposing changes to the paint and I hope the government will go further by expanding the safeguard to protect consumers by accepting this amendment.

I would like to be included in the new clause 3 which would require the government to look at the feasibility of asking large hospitality businesses to disclose country of origin business. They have been pushing for clearer labelling for some time. Previous research has shown 65% of consumers research has shown 65% of consumers are more likely to do this and only 70% agree it is part of the sourcing of food. Farmers across the country are grappling with this family from tax and continue to cope with the challenges imposed by trade deals and better labelling would give crucial support to farmers and their businesses and I hope the government will support this in a step in removing bad and I would urge the government to support clause 4 which I will put to vote later and I will take the opportunity to take the opportunity to thank the honourable member because I enjoyed listening to the honourable member about the manufacturer of ceramics and he has eloquently made the point about the importance of UK manufacturing and most importantly the sense of place it evokes and the pride local people and feel in products produced in their own towns, cities, regions and why so many consumers want to see labelling of UK products because they will now it is a quality mark as well as the honourable gentleman has said expresses their own pride If the government were to accept our new clause four, it will be a voluntary labelling scheme, clearly marking goods manufactured in the UK, helping the consumer make an informed choice and making it easier for the government to support domestic producers.

The amendment would also set up a promotional campaign, to ensure that consumers are aware of the scheme. Having spent the last five years grappling with the bureaucracy brings it, increased trading costs and the ongoing cost of living crisis, business owners will be deeply concerned by the additional challenges coming from Washington. We need to bring the country together and collectively show that we will not take Trump's tariffs lying down, by rallying around our businesses at home, and abroad. And setting of the campaign, with industry leaders made in Britain, feeling a surge leadership, with the introduction in tariffs, as more And promotion.

Across the UK, buying British, championing our local businesses and supporting high streets, this new clause would be a key step in supporting them to do so, I very much welcome all Staffordshire MPs if they wish to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

join us in the voting lobbies this afternoon. First of all, I thank the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

First of all, I thank the honourable lady for her kind words about the work my colleagues are doing. The only thing I would say that under .7 of her new clause, the paragraph that allows for, where a significant process occurs in the significant process occurs in the UK, that is one of the things we are trying to clamp down on, under ceramic production, bisque firing outside of the UK, bringing into the UK for the gloss fire in Conakry to get past others made in the UK, we are trying to argue that shouldn't are trying to argue that shouldn't be the case, should be the full product from clay to table.

So, whilst I have absolute sympathy with her amendment, that clause of the her amendment, that clause of the bottom would not address the damage in our industry, but if she were to discuss it outside the place, I'm sure there is someplace we would have commonality for future work together.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable gentleman very much and for that further information about the ceramics industry, which I feel so much better informed about, but he made a better informed about, but he made a very valuable point about when we talk about made in the UK, what does that mean? How can we use this valuable designation to best support our domestic industries? I thank him our domestic industries? I thank him for that further clarification. In conclusion, the Liberal Democrats support the need to update regularly support the need to update regularly framework for UK marketplace to reduce trade friction and give reduce trade friction and give businesses and consumers confidence in their product and we are glad that many of the measures in this bill will work to that effect.

But bill will work to that effect. But we remain concerned by the excessive ministerial exception in this legislation and reliance on secondary legislation and we will continue to push the government on mechanisms and fairer regulations for online marketplaces. Crucially, for online marketplaces. Crucially, I hope the government will take this opportunity to really support British businesses by supporting new clause four by giving customers greater transparency in giving British businesses the boost they need. Thank you.
17:04
Harriett Baldwin Portrait Dame Harriett Baldwin MP (West Worcestershire, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you very much, Madame Deputy Speaker. And can I say what an interesting debate on the amendments this has been. And I have a huge amount of sympathy for the case being put forward through new clause one. And in the very coherent way it has been made. I also have great sympathy for the honourable lady from Walthamstow, and her proposal for new clause 15, and I will be explaining how some of our amendments address some of the issues that she has been speaking about.

And then, with the Liberal Democrat amendments, in particular new clause four, I think it makes a great deal of sense. And the honourable gentleman from North Antrim has also tabled a range of amendments which cover some of the points which I am about to cover in His Majesty's loyal opposition's amendments. Because I think we should ask ourselves why this relatively small and technical bill has actually attracted nearly 50 amendments act report. It is because actually, as someone said earlier, a Trojan horse bill.

It is a bill which does a lot more beyond the scenes that is covered on its surface. That is why we have tabled the amendments that we have. Of course, we think that when the voters of Britain, an 80% turnout in 2016, voted to leave the European 2016, voted to leave the European Union, it created the opportunity for this country to table a regime so it best fits British industry and sets a global standard, so it is easier to do business.

In fact, the UK's Product Regulation and Metrology Bill as we heard from our resident ecologist, once set the standard for the world, and has the chance to do so, so when we started the work of capitalising on that opportunity, and we see this bill as a terrible step back and a Trojan horse. Because it ties us to EU red tape, on which we have no safe we have from the honourable gentleman, when he was speaking to the amendments from Harlow, about the intentions he hopes it has for businesses in Harlow.

We believe this is a Trojan horse bill, where Labour will restrict Britain's innovators through over burdensome regulations, meaning British industry will fall behind international competitors. It is a prime example, as we heard from the Liberal Democrat spokesman speaking to her amendments, of a skeleton bill. It raises two major areas of concern for His Majesty's loyal opposition. They are the use of the sweeping Henry VIII powers. And the ability to dynamically align by the back door, with the European Union.

And so, I will speak to the amendments which I have tabled, to address those concerns. The delegated regulatory reform committee, any other place we started this passage, found the powers in this bill were excessive and they recommended they be removed. Particularly enclose one -- In clause one, and we address those elements of clause one. In the other place, the government watered down the bill, following those criticisms. But it is still described afterwards as a skeleton bill, which shifted powers to an unacceptable extent.

And as recently as the 21st of for. This year -- 21st February of this year, the other place said, amendments made in the other place are limited changes that do not address the fundamental concern we have about the skeletal nature of this bill. The government has not taken the opportunity to add flesh to the bones of this skeleton bill. It remains the case the bill provides for almost all of the substance of the regulatory regimes for metrology to be provided for by ministers in regulation.

And while we acknowledge the current Secretary of State may act responsibly, we do not want to put things in the statute, Madame Deputy Speaker, which future ministers might treat differently. Because while we all agree, that strong consistent product safety rules are needed, we acknowledge the risks from online marketplaces and acknowledge the risk from unsafe inputs. We do not think this bill is the right way to do it and we think Parliament must retain proper oversight. Our amendments, nine, 11 and 12, seek to remove those powers granted to the Secretary of State in clause one.

And the bill in clause three is of equal concern. Because provisions within clause frequently Secretary of State sweeping powers to create new criminal offences, creating new new criminal offences, creating new complexities in our criminal system. It would allow ministers to create new criminal offences and civil sanctions for non-compliance with product and metrology regulations through secondary legislation, through secondary legislation, introducing -- Reducing the level, this important area for our constituency freedoms. The clause also allows governments to introduce new penalties, including even prison sentences, new powers of entry, and the ability to charge Newfoundland businesses, driving up the cost of doing business.

-- New fines on businesses. Our amendments seek to change those elements of the bill. change those elements of the bill. We believe that when offences are as serious as these, they should have considerably more parliamentary scrutiny. That is why our amendments 2460 when she would let new criminal offences, which could have consequences for the Ministry of Justice, for the Criminal Justice Act system, are not created through product regulations in the act. Our amendments 21, 22 and 23 seek clarification... I give way to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable gentleman. What the honourable lady agree that it is quite astounding that that it is quite astounding that within the criminal offences within the criminal offences anticipated to be made by the Minister, without parliamentary scrutiny, are indictable offences. Indictable offences, which could see Indictable offences, which could see one lose their liberty, for whatever period is specified in the offence. period is specified in the offence. Isn't that a retrograde departure from the oversight that any citizen would expect the members of the would expect the members of the would expect the members of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

would expect the members of the , of these offences? I do agree with that comment at the time, where we know the types of people who are being let out of prison by this government, the idea that suddenly, there will be new imprisonable offences for perhaps inadvertently finding oneself with some products in stock that have not flown dynamic alignment process, that has not been very visible to Parliament, I think it's a total scandal. And that is why I hope the whole house will support our amendments 24 later on in the lobby.

Our amendments also seek clarification of this specific function. That may be conferred upon a relevant authority. And the powers that may be granted to inspectors. Relevant authorities used throughout, and it is not entirely clear what all these relevant authorities might be, Madame Deputy Speaker. In clause 13, we once again see Henry VIII powers being utilised, despite the concerns raised in the other place. So, our amendment 18 adds to subsection 6 of clause 13, and requires any regulations made under the act that amend or replace primary legislation be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.

And I am sure all parliamentarians will want to support that amendment.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point, just to expand on issues already raise. I'm sure the issues already raise. I'm sure the Minister will come back and say you can trust us, trust this government. But would the shadow minister also agree that they may not always be in power, so these powers they are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

power, so these powers they are creating for themselves may be handed down to someone less responsible in the future? I wholeheartedly endorse that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wholeheartedly endorse that. Because it is the principal. We do Because it is the principal. We do not know the executive in the future not know the executive in the future that we are handling the power to commit as the current executive is commit as the current executive is asking for that power. We have -- We are a democracy. It would be wrong for Parliament to give away its powers in this legislation in the way that has been proposed.

And that is why I hope everyone will support

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our amendments later. I am very grateful to my honourable friend for giving way. I remember sitting through the last remember sitting through the last Parliament through many bills, when many members of the Labour Party many members of the Labour Party when they were in opposition talking about the importance of parliamentary scrutiny. Does my honourable friend agree with me the amendments today that His Majesty's amendments today that His Majesty's opposition are tabling are all about improving and bolstering parliamentary scrutiny? So, members opposite have nothing to fear by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

giving more powers to this House? My honourable friend is so wise and he is indeed so insightful, because it was in fact the Secretary because it was in fact the Secretary of State himself in opposition who said that we must bear in mind the said that we must bear in mind the delegated carries a risk of abuse by the executive, which is not something the opposition could ever support. Rather, it is our duty at this stage to check the powers of the executive and ensure we are not giving them carte blanche to change the balance of power permanently in their favour, but that is exactly what they are asking for a noticed bill today.

And so, that is what we urge members to support our amendments. It is not just the Secretary of State himself. Let's listen to what our friend, the Attorney-General of this great United Kingdom, Lord Hermer, has said. Another member of His Majesty's government. He said that Henry VIII powers were a strike at the rule of law, despite their inclusion in this bill. The Attorney-General said that skeleton legislation, delegated Henry VIII legislation, " Not only strike a rule of law, but also at the cardinal principles of accessibility and legal certainty." And yet, Madame Deputy Speaker, we are being asked this evening to allow criminal sanctions and the possibility of imprisonment to go through using imprisonment to go through using I 16 is for product requirements to be removed if amendments are met and we believe the UK should set its own product regulations to foster innovation, support domestic industry, and not automatically align with EU rules which we no longer have any influence or ability longer have any influence or ability to shape.

The second area, if I may, where we have tabled further amendments, is to do with this issue of dynamic alignment and we have heard that is the very purpose of this bill and we believe that I alignment with EU regulation should be a decision for the House to make and the interpretation must only be undertaken by UK courts rather than international courts. We believe we took back those very powers and in this bill the Secretary of State is taking the powers to give them away.

Amendment 10 removes the ability of the Secretary of State to make recommendations about the marketing or use our products and this is similar to relevant EU law for the purpose of mitigating the environment and the environmental impact of products and the amendments specifically require parliamentary approval with EU law. Amendment 17 states this must only be undertaken by UK courts and we also want to ensure that regulations under the bill do not damage any other international agreements to government might want to strike and saw clause 13 would ensure any regulations made under the powers of the bill do not undermine existing or future trade deals including with key partners like the US, India, Japan, Australia, Canada.

That is a pragmatic and necessary step towards maintaining the strength of UK trade relationships and protect the long- term prosperity of our businesses. The government has thought many times about growth being a top priority and so this will ensure regulations made under the bill must prioritise economic growth. Amendment eight would require the Secretary of State to actively promote investment, innovation, economic growth and is a forward- looking vision, positioning the UK as a global leader in innovation and ensuring that we support prosperity and not just compliance.

When the bill left the other place, the lead minister in the other place that that we have taken it from the early state to where it is today and it will go to the other place and I'm sure the noble Lord is right there will be further deliberation and hopefully we will get it to a better place and yet there have not been significant changes and I would recommend that the House supports the amendments that we have tabled in the lobbies this evening.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I come to the Minister. Thank you. I thank all members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I thank all members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I thank all members I thank all the other members who have contributed and they have
17:20
Justin Madders Portrait Justin Madders MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough, Labour)
-
-
addressed many points which were raised and I welcome the spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats into the new role. As always, it was a pleasure to hear from the Member for a wash and we have our own Professor in the House and his expertise was greatly appreciated in the appeal committee and again today turning to the amendments nine, 11, 12, removes clause 1.1 from the bill and this is the power to keep consumers safe and as I said at committee, the framework is extensive and removing this clause would freeze regulations in time and I cannot accept an amendment which would protect us...

I will. It is also about protecting consumers and that is what it intends to do, protect consumers, so intends to do, protect consumers, so consumers are aware and will they work to get legislation?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will address it in due course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will address it in due course. It is consumer -related rather than It is consumer -related rather than product safety and I will address it in due course. And there are a lot in due course. And there are a lot in due course. And there are a lot Powers were removed including Henry VIII powers and we've added a statutory requirement unpublished a statutory requirement unpublished a code of conduct available and it code of conduct available and it sets out how this bill will be used and it strikes the right balance.

and it strikes the right balance. There are highly technical product regulations and it would leave consumers unprotected. Turning to 10, 14, 17, 39-32, these are related to EU law and to be clear yet again, the powers of the bill gives the UK the flexibility to manage the regulatory framework and part of this is making sure the UK can respond to developments and this respond to developments and this does not mean the UK will be committed.

This will fit under the Windsor Framework and the reason the bill explicitly references the EU rather than jurisdictions as most of it is inherited from EU law. The UK continues to recognise certain product requirements and this was enacted under the previous government and the powers allow us to continue recognition based on interests on a case-by-case basis and decisions of the two divers will be made as the come along and recognition would be stated and can only be enforced by UK authorities and the bill does not grant jurisdiction to foreign courts.

Amendment 15 would prevent this and I find it to be an odd amendment to be pushed by the Conservative Party given the introduced speculation a year ago which did the opposite. On year ago which did the opposite. On the new clause these eight, 14, 16, 17, these deal with themes of EU law, Parliamentary scrutiny, EU oversight and duplicate riposte safeguards already in the bill and the statutory and nonstatutory controls from the code of conduct including consultation and a better framework and the government values the role in scrutinising the legislation and so we will continue to make sure the regulations work for the old UK.

21, 12, 18, 30 21, 12, 18, 31 parliamentary scrutiny, the bill refers to key areas including the creation of criminal offences contrary to what has been set this afternoon and amending primary legislation and since the introduction of the bill and in response to the matters which were raised, now we have additional areas set out in clause 34 and so I can confirm the procedure applies to the following in terms of criminal offences and online marketplaces and the first time these duties were imposed and the regulations confirming powers of entry, certain inspection, requirements with response to emergency and regulations on care between persons, cost recovery, amending or repealing best and consequential amendments to legislation and amending the definition of online marketplaces

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and, on that note, I give way. Does the Minister agree online

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does the Minister agree online marketplaces should have greater responsibility to ensure the safety

**** Possible New Speaker ****

responsibility to ensure the safety and authenticity of products that they sell, just like a retailer on the high street? That is one of the reasons it has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That is one of the reasons it has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That is one of the reasons it has been introduced because we have two keep up to date with developments in the online marketplace and that is why we've introduced this why we've introduced this legislation. It is not unbridled use of powers. It is a clear set of principles and use of the affirmative and in most cases there affirmative and in most cases there is already a number of regulations is already a number of regulations which will be transposed as they stand because there are about 2500 pages of regulation already including things to do with noise levels from certain types of machinery or the ergonomic design of PPE.

The regulations cover matters like that and it risks a level of technicality which I think only the right honourable member could follow and I do not think it is good use of parliamentary time and I believe the Opposition would think that as well and that is why the Paris in the consumer protection act remained in place under successive government and that a similar to what we are dealing with today. I will deal with the amendment by my right honourable friend, the member for Walthamstow, because she raised important points and I thank you for setting out the rationale so clearly and so I want to ensure that we are not looking at the same level of regulatory change and what we experienced when we left the EU and we anticipate many uses of these powers and this is because the fundamentals were already in UK law and there are thousands of pages which I prefer to, many of which have been through previous scrutiny processes.

I recognise the concerns processes. I recognise the concerns raised and there are major changes which were transposed using the procedure and the bill contains many safeguards more than were in place meaning it could be used more often, as I have set out. Careful consideration was given in making sure we struck the right balance between good use of parliamentary time and the processing of technical changes. I've listened to concerns of the Regulatory Reform Committee and looked at the areas.

Technical regulations on the breadth and complexity produced cannot be enacted by this legislation and we use this to -- if we use it every time, we have little time for anything else. We published a code of conduct sitting at statutory and nonstatutory guardrails in place before regulations can be made including a statement on how we will consult with a wide range of stakeholders and ensure their views are considered. We will review and update the code of conduct and will be happy to take suggestions on how to be clear about the role of Parliament in the scrutiny of regulation.

I believe we have struck the right balance to keep metrology regulations up to date and I hope it gives my honourable friend some reassurances.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for setting that out and is helpful and reassuring for many of us. In this instance, we're talking about a small handful of regulations that small handful of regulations that would be affected by this and I hope this is part of a wider call to look at this across the piece and I'm sure the Minister will want to fit sure the Minister will want to fit that in and is welcome and I'm sure everyone who signed the amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

everyone who signed the amendment I'm so members will have heard

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm so members will have heard her contribution today. Turning to amendment seven on consumer amendment seven on consumer protection. Such an amendment could have unintended consequences as product safety is not one- dimensional. It requires consideration of multiple risks and consideration of multiple risks and consumer business needs. To give an example of this, we are undertaking a figure program of work concerning furniture safety. The balance between fibres and the effects of exposure to chemical flames. The amendment as it is would leave us open to challenge by any interest groups on how regulations balance this.

In the Bill Committee I gave it as an example of why we could not accept the amendment. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson at that time said that was a compelling example of why the amendment would be accepted so I hope the new spokesperson will take that back. Amendments five and six on that circular economy are unnecessary as the Environment Act 2021 requires the government to consider the environmental impact of any new policies and the Consumer Rights Act including provisions on the right to repair.

On a new clause 19, relating to the U.K.'s trade agreements, the government is committed to meeting our operations on UK training, and nothing in this bill will contradict this. Courses five and six relates to small and medium-sized businesses, the purpose of course fibres already met through existing practices, and new clause 6 has already met and any regulations will be assessed in line with the regulation framework. Similarly amendment eight on economic growth is unnecessary. All regulations will be subject to a statutory consultation and require an impact assessment as per the regulation framework.

And the bill will allow greatest implication and greater clarity on product requirements which should ease burdens on industry. Turning now to amendment three and new clause 10 on online marketplaces, I agree all of this must be kept within the regulatory framework. That is why we have recognised and defined the online marketplaces in the bill as well as clause 231 to ensure any person can engage in activities relating to a product and can be brought within the scope including fulfilment. So at the earliest opportunity we intend to consult on requirements in relation to online marketplaces to protect consumers, and proportionate to business models.

This bill gives us the opportunity to develop appropriate requirements following consultation. This is better than requiring specific obligations irrespective of the outcome of consultations and consideration of proportionality. New clause 7 relates to online marketplaces being held liable for products purchased by their platforms, and we agree that there is scope in this area for improvements to be made which is why I have asked the Law Commission to conduct a full on, hence the review of products via legislation and make suggestions for reform.

Following their report which we anticipate will be released next year, we will legislate if necessary to ensure our products live laws are up-to-date and fit for the future. Turning briefly to new clause 9, on iron batteries, it gives categories including lithium-ion batteries. Our including lithium-ion batteries. Our concerns about this remains broad to deal with products effectively for top to improve lithium-ion batteries safety, we have looked at Warwick are group which has highlighted risks and issues. This will look at regulatory standards and improve guidance.

We are committed to collaborating with stakeholders to determine what action should be taken forward. Amendments 21 to 24, removes powers and would make requirements for new supply chain act is ineffective. So without powers to effectively enforce requirements new good businesses will be undermined. I can assure the House that use of this powers already has precedent. The Building Safety Act 2022 is a recent example of where primary legislation created similar powers. New clause 11 and amendment four relates to product recall procedures.

Supply chain actors are already under duty to report incidents to enforcement authorities, and the public can access an online database with records, product safety reports, and furthermore there are legislative roots for consumers to pursue their rights including rights to repair, replace, or refund through various legislation such as the Consumer Protection Act 1997 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. The government is reviewing records as well as the full product safety metal so it is effective. The consultation following Royal assent will streak views on the structure of such powers.

Turning to new clause 12, local authorities do vital work across several areas of consumer protection. This bill is not the appropriate vehicle for a broader review of enforcement capability and consumer protection legislation as it is limited to product metrology relation. This bill will help local authorities by simplifying plant safety legislation and allowing the government to consolidate enforcement powers. It will also ride cost recovery powers to be obtained by local authorities, something I honourable Friend from something I honourable Friend from hollow has raised.

Turning to new clauses 1, two, three, and four relating to product labelling, we won't be accepting them. I thank my honourable friend for submitting new clause 1 and shining a light as yours does on an important UK sector. And of course important in his part of the world. Manufacturers can already indicate the country of origin on their labelling, as long as the information is accurate, and falsely claiming products are made in the UK is an offence under existing law which prohibits misleading consumers.

I understand battlefront has a Private Members' Bill on the country of origin, this was introduced on 2 April and is due for Second Reading I think next week. I will be interested to hear that debate, and I'm always willing to engage on important issues for his constituents. New clauses two, three, and four relate to issues where secondary legislation already applies. New clause two on the price of goods falls under the price marking order 2004 which includes requirements for unit pricing to be clearly labelled.

There are developments in this area, so the Competition and Markets Authority published a report in July 2023 on the use of unit pricing in-store and online in the grocery sector. Following this, recommendations to reform unit price legislation and propose reforms to the price marking is in 2004. The amendments to the order will come into force next April and will introduce additional requirements for retailers such as consistency in unit pricing which means that all unit prices sold by weight or volume will be displayed in either kilograms or litres, but will be strict criteria on price eligibility, and items for how multibyte items should be displayed.

We believe this will allow retailers to provide the information customers need to make informed purchasing choices. And finally new clauses 3 and four in the country of origin information, this is already required for certain foods including B. Origin labelling for food products is well beyond the intended focus of this bill. It is the case that current rules do not prevent British products being labelled as British. This is often done voluntarily, indeed reference was made in the campaign which is already in place.

So we do not believe that legislating in a voluntary system where voluntary system is already in place is necessary. In light of that I would ask that all the amendments and new clauses are withdrawn.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is it your pleasure that new clause 1 be withdrawn? New clause by clause 1 be withdrawn? New clause by leave withdrawn. New clause 4 has been selected for separate decision. I called the Liberal Democrat I called the Liberal Democrat spokesperson to move new clause 4 formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Formerly Madam Deputy Speaker. Produced or manufactured products. Question is that new clause 4 be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question is that new clause 4 be read a second time. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". Division, clear the The The question The question is The question is that The question is that new The question is that new clause The question is that new clause 4 The question is that new clause 4 we read a second time. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye".

And of the contrary, "No". Tellers for the ayes Susan Murray and Tessa Hunt. Tellers
17:46
None Portrait Division
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Locked Locked the Locked the doors!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order. Order, order. The Order, order. The Ayes Order, order. The Ayes to Order, order. The Ayes to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The Ayes to the right, 171, the Noes to left, 274.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

right, 171, the Noes to left, 274. The Ayes to the right, 171, the Noes to the left, 274, the Noes have Noes to the left, 274, the Noes have Amendment to 16 has been selected for separate decision, I called the opposition spokesperson to move formally. The question is that formally. The question is that amendment 16 be made. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question Question is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question is that Question is that amendment Question is that amendment 16 Question is that amendment 16 be made. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". Tellers for the Ayes, Andrew Snowdon and Gregory Stafford, tells

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock Lock the Lock the doors.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. Order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. The ayes to the right 100. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left 339. The ayes to the right 100. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right 100. The noes to the left 339. The noes have noes to the left 339. The noes have it. The noes have it. Unlock. Order. it. The noes have it. Unlock. Order. Order. Under the order of the house of 1 April, I must now put the of 1 April, I must now put the questions necessary to bring proceedings on consideration to a conclusion. Amendment 24 has been selected for separate decision.

I called the opposition spokesperson to move the amendment formally. The question is that amendment 24 be made. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, say, "Aye". And of the contrary, The The question The question is The question is that The question is that amendment The question is that amendment 24 The question is that amendment 24 be made. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". Tellers for the ayes Andrew Snowden Gregory Stafford.

Tellers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock the Lock the doors!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. I've Order, order. I've met Order, order. I've met the Order, order. I've met the right,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. I've met the right, and hundred city for, the Noes to the left, 273.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the left, 273. The Ayes to the right, 164, the Noes to the left, 273. The Noes have it. Unlock!
18:24
18:24
Justin Madders Portrait Legislation: Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords]: Remaining stages Justin Madders MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough, Labour)
-
-
global Leader. Supporting businesses, protecting consumers and ensuring a fair playing field across the economy, whether on the High Street or online marketplaces. It is designed to futureproof the approach to regulation, ensuring we can respond effectively to emerging technologies, tackle safety challenges and create the conditions of safe innovation and economic growth. By strengthening the system that underpins confidence in our markets, we are reinforcing the core pillars of a productive, competitive economy. As honourable members will know, the majority of the U.K.'s product safety and metrology laws have their roots in EU legislation, developed over the past 40 years.

That framework served us well in the EU and we therefore have a responsibility and opportunity to tailor our rules to the U.K.'s own needs, circumstances and ambitions. The pace of change...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way, we have heard today, and Bill Committee, arguments for this measure. Fair enough... Is in fact measure. Fair enough... Is in fact some mysterious way back into the some mysterious way back into the EU. Does he agreed that the opposition, are far from discovering The Trojan Horse Affair they are The Trojan Horse Affair they are trying to flog a dead one and their arguments are made up on the hoof. arguments are made up on the hoof.

from my honourable friend. I have heard so many references to horses heard so many references to horses during the passage of this bill, at during the passage of this bill, at times I felt I was at Aintree racecourse. We can be clear, this is not something that will lead to dynamic by default... way, we heard a lot of myths about the end of the great British point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Indeed, thanks to amendments in the other place, it will hopefully the other place, it will hopefully the other place, it will hopefully to joining him and enjoying one at some point in the not-too-distant some point in the not-too-distant consumer and product innovation is consumer and product innovation is to new materials and manufacturing. to new materials and manufacturing. regulation is shifting. We must make regulation is shifting. We must make sure regulators can work quickly and proportionally to manage the hazards and economic potential.

The Bill provides the powers to do that, it provides the powers to do that, it gives Parliament the ability to strengthen regulation in a coherent way. It is a framework that...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way, I wonder if he agrees that this way, I wonder if he agrees that this Bill is instrumental in ensuring the Bill is instrumental in ensuring the UK... This Bill keeps the UK at the UK... This Bill keeps the UK at the forefront of ensuring our country is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

at the front of science, He has got the measure of this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He has got the measure of this Bill. This is a framework that Bill. This is a framework that supports businesses by reducing unnecessary burdens come supports consumers by keeping dangerous goods consumers by keeping dangerous goods off the market and supports the economy by making the system more ensure every product on the UK

**** Possible New Speaker ****

market, whether made in the UK or imported, The safety element is about enforcement, is he able to say a bit

**** Possible New Speaker ****

enforcement, is he able to say a bit about the conversation happening across government to make sure our enforcement agencies are properly resourced? My honourable friend makes an important point, the local, important point, the local, department will be primarily to responsible for it. The Bill does responsible for it. The Bill does give power, fundraising powers in give power, fundraising powers in terms of the ability of local trading standards, to increase debt enforcement by cost raising enforcement by cost raising measures.

This Bill affects the whole of the UK and we have worked whole of the UK and we have worked closely and constructively with devolved governments, there has been regular engagement with devolved governments throughout the Bill's governments throughout the Bill's passage, both ministerial and official level. I want to thank the official level. I want to thank the devolved governments, business and their teams for working so constructively. At Committee stage, we tabled an amendment that would place a statutory requirement on the Secretary of State to obtain the consent of the devolved governments regulations contain provision within their competence.

We believe this provides the most effective and appropriate role for the devolved governments enabling that respect the individual settlements. I am pleased to report there was a Legislative Consent motion passed yesterday, I have also had discussions with the Scottish Government and Northern Ireland Executive, who have both recommended legislative consent. And we continue to work collaboratively going forward with those bodies to develop product regulation that best supports businesses and consumers across the whole of the UK. I would like to quickly recap on some of the changes the government have made since its introduction, last year, in addition to the devolution amendment, there has been some misconception about what this Bill does and does not do.

We have added a statutory consultation mechanism to ensure that stakeholders can shape regulations. We have extended the affirmative procedure's two further parts of this Bill to boost parliamentary scrutiny. For the avoidance of doubt, those are detailed in clause 13, the affirmative procedure applies to the creation of criminal offences, the first use of regulations covering online marketplaces, the first time duties are imposed on a new supply chain actor. For regulations conferring powers of entry, search or inspection, for regulations to supply, requirements in response to an emergency, for regulations covering the sharing of information between persons, regulations on cost recovery, which I already referred Regulations amending or repealing the facts.

Revelations on controversial amendments to primary legislation and regulations amending the definition of online marketplaces. And this will be where the response is to the report stage Bill, there were a very clear number of reasons why we want to have that flexibility in terms of online marketplaces which we feel will develop in ways we can't predict the future. I can confirm that aviation safety products are exempted from this bill, as they are covered in other existing legislation. The government has also published a Code of Conduct that sets out a statutory and nonstatutory guardrails to ensure that regulation made under this legislation is proportionate and well-designed, and I think it is worth addressing this criticism that this is a skeletal bill.

It is worth pointing out that the proportion of skeletal bills tripled in the period from 2016 until 2023 prepared to the period from 1991 until 2015. The period from 2016 until 2023 some 90 separate bills were described as skeletal by the DPRRC.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way. Would he agree with me that far way. Would he agree with me that far from being skeletal bill, what the bill actually provides for is an adaptable framework of product regulation and consumer safety?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

regulation and consumer safety? My honourable friend is absolutely right. This goes well absolutely right. This goes well beyond the measures that were in place when we were in the EU in terms of parliamentary involvement. terms of parliamentary involvement. I will now briefly just make some I will now briefly just make some reference to contributions made by honourable members through the passage of this bill. I would like passage of this bill. I would like to thank my counterpart on the bill in the other place, Lord Young, for in the other place, Lord Young, for shepherding the bill through the shepherding the bill through the other place as well as having support from Kings Heath, from Lord Hunt of Kings Heath.

And the honourable gentleman who has been by my side throughout the passage of this bill and in the Bill Committee for the honourable members for Wokingham, chipping and Richmond Park represented the Liberal Democrats at committee, a trio that we will never forget. I hope the short passage of this bill is not a reflection of the high turnover in Liberal Democrat spokespeople. They have engaged with the bill in a constructive manner Madam Deputy Speaker. But also members who engaged in that Bill Committee and the honourable members for South Holland and The Deepings, and those who chaired the Bill Committee with great expertise.

It is probably worth urging my honourable friend who again today has championed the ceramics industry and we recognise his great contributions in respect of that. But finally, we need to pay special tribute to the member for Erewash who, as the first elected metrology to this House, has brought a deeply technical and knowledgeable perspective to this which I think we all appreciate, although I don't we could ever be asked to undertake a quiz on the finer details of his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

work. I thank the Minister for giving way. On the points he makes, I wonder if he could elaborate on how this bill supports the advancement of British science?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of British science? I suspect actually my honourable friend is far better at doing that. I think his speech at Second Reading was really a fantastic example of was really a fantastic example of how we explain legislation matters how we explain legislation matters and practices, and of course it is important that we have certainty, we have consistency, and are able to make sure that there is a clear and make sure that there is a clear and legislative framework for legislative framework for measurements and I know he gave a very historical sweep of those issues when he spoke at Second Reading.

Finally, it is important that I pass on my gratitude to all those officials who have supported us in the passage of this bill, as well as Parliamentary staff who have helped enable this to come through swiftly and smoothly. The bill will hopefully return to the other place for consideration of the amendments we have made in this place. I am confident that in the spirit of constructive scrutiny and cooperation which is characteristic of its progress so far, the bill will continue on its way.

This legislation is an important step in strengthening our domestic regulatory regime. We must ensure it is robust, it is future facing and fit for purpose in a post-Brexit economy. I look forward to working with colleagues to ensure the bill finally reaches the statute book as swiftly as possible.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the bill now be read the third time. Shadow Secretary of State. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Let me place on record my thanks to the member for West Worcestershire, the right honourable member for the right honourable member for Basildon and Billericay, metaphor Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, and the member for Chester South and the member for Chester South and Eddisbury for their work in holding the government to account on this bill. At the second reading I said it was the archetype of everything it was the archetype of everything that is sometimes wrong with Westminster but now, after months of Westminster but now, after months of debate in both houses, I fear this is even worse.

In 2017, the Napa minister said his party would respect the outcome of the
18:37
Andrew Griffith Portrait Andrew Griffith MP (Arundel and South Downs, Conservative)
-
-
respect the outcome of the referendum in which 17 in which 17 million people voted to leave the European Union. Britain has now fallen victim to labours EU surrender summits, giving up our fishing rights and our ability to make our own laws. I am happy to concede that this is no longer a Trojan horse of a surrender bill because it is now in plain sight. It is absurd that any government would give up power to shape our own regulations and meet the needs of our own consumers and businesses.

As economies that will succeed in the future are those which are agile, which can adjust dynamically to events, tailor their own rulebook to their own particular needs. Whilst the track record of this government is frankly disastrous, I still give the government the benefit of the doubt when they say they wish for growth. But for the benefit of those opposite who I rather suspect have not read the detail of this bill, they have been whipped into supporting it, let me spell out what it does.

The dynamic alignment clauses in this bill would mean that every time the EU tweaks its standards, shaped by the interest of 27 other states, with the only different mix of businesses, often in competition with ours, Britain must follow suit. No more bespoke trade deals around the world, as the prime minister and his team will be lame-duck negotiators with the EU president holding the real strings. The government boasts of three trade deals in three weeks, and that is a hollow boast when not a single one is backed up by any detail.

The Trade Secretary is noticeably absent today, no doubt trying to make true what his prime minister has already announced, the Paymaster General this afternoon, in a written answer to me, confirmed that British businesses, exporters, travellers, and tourists, will not benefit from e-gate's as we were promised. And yet the government in all its naivete is legislating to hand control of our product regulations back to Brussels. At every stage of scrutiny, this bill has been found wanting. A mild-mannered Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in the other place delivered an uncharacteristically scathing rebuke, branding it a skeleton bill that grotesquely shifts legislative power from Parliament to ministers.

It shackles British business, already bleeding out, to EU standards, stifling innovation. It is a solution in search of a problem, and under this bill, and the measures being brought forward by this government today, there is no room for the sort of robust scrutiny that we were all sent here by our constituents to do. No accountability, it is all in the hands of ministers keep breaking their promises. So let's be clear, Labour's pattern of broken promises does not just set Britain back, it erode the trust that people have in politics will stop this House has a duty to restore faith in our democracy, to protect our hardfought sovereignty to say no to the overreach of blank cheque ministerial powers such as in this bill, this house must tonight reject this bill, as we will, to stop this government from forsaking Britain's ability to carve and determine its

**** Possible New Speaker ****

own future. The question is that the bill now be read the third time. As many as be read the third time. As many as are of that opinion say 'aye.' And are of that opinion say 'aye.' And of the contrary, "No". Division, The The question The question is The question is that The question is that the The question is that the bill The question is that the bill be read the third time.

As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". Tellers for the ayes Vicky Foxcroft and Anna Turley. Tellers for the noes Rebecca Paul
18:43
None Portrait Division
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Locked Locked the Locked the doors!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can Can we Can we investigate Can we investigate the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can we investigate the delay Can we investigate the delay in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. Order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. The ayes to the right 264. The noes to the left 99.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left 99. The ayes to the right 264. The noes to the left 99. The ayes have noes to the left 99. The ayes have noes to the left 99. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.. Unlock. 7

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it. The ayes have it.. Unlock. 7 o'clock motion, it is that you move formally. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move. The question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number three, money. Minister to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I move formally. The question is as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. The ayes "No". The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number four on investigatory powers. Mr to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

investigatory powers. Mr to move. I beg to move. The question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. The ayes "No". The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number five on electricity. Mr to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

electricity. Mr to move. I beg to move. The question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye". And of the contrary, "No". The division is defiled until

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Wednesday next. Petition, Wendy Chamberlain. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Today my constituent presented a Today my constituent presented a petition to Number 10 Downing Street with over 200,000 signatures. She and her brother started the petition and her brother started the petition calling for more investment and political will in early detection of pancreatic cancer the night before he died just weeks after his he died just weeks after his he died just weeks after his diagnosis. I'm presenting the petition on behalf of her and the hundreds of thousands of others who lose loved ones because of the lack lose loved ones because of the lack of early detection.

The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the government to consider the resource needs in relation to research and of elements relation to research and of elements of tests for the early detection of pancreatic cancer, and ensure the appropriate tools are available to general practitioners across the NHS

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition early detection of pancreatic cancer.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

pancreatic cancer. I beg to move that this house do now adjourn.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now adjourn. The question is that this House do now adjourn. Peter Swallow.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

do now adjourn. Peter Swallow. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I am delighted to have secured this
19:04
19:04
None Portrait Adjournment: Street parking on estates in Bracknell Forest
-

agenda perhaps, but one which affects the lives of hundreds of people in my constituency every day. Street parking on residential Street parking on residential estates in Bracknell. It is a topic estates in Bracknell. It is a topic that perhaps comes up more than any other, particularly in parts of Bracknell where we have older Bracknell where we have older estates. And it is a real real challenge for people, one that affects not only their ability to get around our fantastic community, but also in some cases safety as well.

One of the core challenges we face is the mismatch between older estates design and modern car ownership. Bracknell is an older Newtown. It's elevated its 75th birthday last year, and while it was designed with excellent active travel network built into the heart of its DNA, it is also true that Bracknell was designed around the car. It is an easy place to get around by car, we are very lucky that we don't see massive issues with traffic jams and the like, but it is the case, as with many towns across the country, people do still rely on their cars.

The challenge is that many of these estates across Bracknell especially in areas like Easthampstead, we see estates that were built when households typically had one small vehicle if that. Now of course many households have more than one car, and the cars are larger to boot. We also because the nature of the housing market are increasingly seeing more generations living in the same family home which only compounds the issue yet further. The garages that were built alongside the states I am talking about in Bracknell Forest were built for a different kind of car.

They are narrow, and many no longer fit cars of the size that people drive today. The obvious conclusion to all of this is exactly what we see. Vehicles spilling out onto roads, verges, pavements, and where households don't have a driveway, that does cause a huge challenge around space.
19:07
Peter Swallow Portrait Peter Swallow MP (Bracknell, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. My honourable friend is making an excellent speech. I think he is about to describe the incredible pressure that many residents feel because of parking problems, that is difficulty of parking near their own home, or that difficulty of perhaps walking along the pavement because there is pavement parking, or many other problems and it drives me actually crazy. There is real pressure on communities up and down the country. Does he agree with me that what is needed is for the government to have a little bit of a new look at some of the existing regulations, further refining the residents parking scheme, and perhaps looking at some of the tricky issues where perhaps there is one person or a group of people parking again and again on an unrestricted road? In my constituency I have had issues where people commuting to work an unfortunate part of the same roads time and again and it can be very frustrating for residents.

As he says the basic problem is there are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

many more vehicles nowadays and it is difficult to accommodate parking needs but we must try. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for that insightful intervention. In Bracknell Forest we have low levels Bracknell Forest we have low levels of permanent parking zones. The reason for that is it simply would reason for that is it simply would not work for our community. The point he makes is absolutely point he makes is absolutely correct, and it is something I will come back to time and time again in this debate, the need for local areas to come up with local solutions to address these very local problems.

Because ultimately communities like his in Reading and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

communities like his in Reading and mine in Bracknell Forest no best what the solutions are to tackle some of these endemic issues. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. This issue is one that plagues residents in my area as well. Two particular issues are parking round school pickup and drop-off which is a particular issue, I wonder if he's found the same? And also in this stage there are difficulties in enforcing when there is dangerous parking. I wonder if he also acknowledges that, it is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

an issue that needs to be addressed with local authorities? Absolutely. The challenge around

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely. The challenge around schools is a really well-made one. schools is a really well-made one. It is of course that we all want to see more young people, more families walking to school, cycling to school, and we have to be realistic and say in some communities it does and say in some communities it does not happen. The end result is often not happen. The end result is often in streets where we see a lot of conflict between those going to pick conflict between those going to pick up their kids from school, and the families who live in those streets families who live in those streets who need frankly to be able to get out and not have to dictate their out and not have to dictate their movements around the timing of the school day.

It is a real challenge. Again, it is the case that in situations like this, local solutions really need to be the vehicle forward, if you will pardon the pun. On the point about enforcement, again, I think it is a really important part of the puzzle. What I would say, and we see this in Bracknell Forest, with all the best will in the world, traffic wardens could come down some of the street in Bracknell Forest every hour of every day and litter every cart with tickets.

Rightly, if that isn't the parking infrastructure there to allow those cars to park, enforcement can only go so far. So I think absolutely enforcement is part of the solution but it is not the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

only part. I thank member for giving way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank member for giving way. And congratulate him for this And congratulate him for this adjournment debates. As he knows, I constituency is also part Bracknell Forest in one of the issues that we Forest in one of the issues that we have in Binfield is a commercial business is being run from residential properties and the increased demands of parking that increased demands of parking that can often have. I support his call for localised support localised action available to target this. He action available to target this.

He

**** Possible New Speaker ****

action available to target this. He liked to work together to see what we can do? This sounds like an excellent

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This sounds like an excellent campaign. Not something I found my partner Bracknell Forest but perhaps we can have a further discussion in we can have a further discussion in the Tea Room on that very important issue.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I spoke to the honourable gentlemen before, can I correct in bringing this forward. The Chaplynka having beforehand on the issues in my constituency, very similar to his own relation to the open estates. The state of the houses were built in the 60s and houses were built in the 60s and 70s, the roads are narrow, the roads were never built for houses with two cards plus. And this is aggravated cards plus. And this is aggravated whenever children learn to drive.

The Department back home came up with the idea of enabling those who with the idea of enabling those who have driveways on the roads that we have a white light put across it have a white light put across it where cars cannot park in front. That is OK in the mind but in That is OK in the mind but in reality does not work because cars have to go in and out. And when cars parked alongside it there is a problem. The other member agree, that it leads to frustration, it leads to anger, it leads to fisticuffs.

It leads to neighbours falling out. And if there is an initiative from this House, it has to start here legislatively or directionally from here, and the councils back home can take responsibility and well done to the honourable judgement for bringing this forward. There is not one of us

**** Possible New Speaker ****

here that does not agree with him. I thank the member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member for intervening. May I say what an honour it is to be intervened by the honourable Member. What I would say honourable Member. What I would say is, I want to take his suggestion and flip it on its head. I do feel that local solutions are the best that local solutions are the best way to tackle what is often local issues. The part of the reason for issues. The part of the reason for that is exactly what we have heard from members across the house today, it is that in every community, almost in every street, the reality almost in every street, the reality is that different issues will be is that different issues will be causing some of the parking woes that we have heard him so powerfully referred to.

For me, this is perhaps the greatest example of an issue that must be led from the bottom up. that must be led from the bottom up. In fact, what I think this place can do is empower local leaders to come forward with commonsense answers, the commonsense strategies to address these very real issues. One of the challenges we have got in Bracknell Forest is that, in estates where a large number of homes without driveways were once council houses, they are now in private ownership.

The estates themselves have been transferred to social housing Association, making the issue even harder to address will stop Bracknell Forest Council is working hard to tackle this in exactly that proactive practical way I have been referring to. They have been undertaking a scheme to convert grass verges into additional parking spaces almost read by road. Identifying underused grass verges and converting them into usable save parking bays. It is being done in partnership with the social housing organisation which is a great example of what can happen when they worked collaboratively together to address shared challenges.

I have to say it has not always been easy, and it has involved complex legal issues around transferring ownership from social housing provider to the council, I do want to thank both the council and the association for working together proactively to address the concerns. I also want to make it this is not a silver bullet. The schemes are making a real difference in parts of Bracknell Forest but I'm fully aware that it is not enough, there are real is not enough, there are real It would be more fantastic to see more action taken from a government status.

It is not about massive investment, it is not even necessarily about a very complex solution, it is very obvious and commonsensical, it is about unlocking existing local potential by simplifying the process. Of course, I do recognise that converting grass verges might be to some and aftermath. I support access to green space and I do not want to see every corner of Bracknell Forest

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tarmac... Thank you, I think he is making

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, I think he is making an excellent point, may I remind him, there is a great deal of brownfield land which can be made brownfield land which can be made available for parking. In my constituency, I worked on a scheme constituency, I worked on a scheme to tarmac and unlock growth, as another colleague mentioned, as the another colleague mentioned, as the areas of hardstanding, not formally used for parking, can be converted used for parking, can be converted without loss of green space.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

A fantastic point, it really reinforces that local need for finding solutions. It is also the finding solutions. It is also the case, as in Bracknell Forest, where cars are parking already, because of cars are parking already, because of the lack of parking spaces, tearing up the grass and causing safety concerns, blocking blind corners, converting some of the verges in a safer way into proper parking spaces is the common sense thing to do. It is making sure that, in fact, we can protect the grass verges that we do need much better.

Another growing pressure on our estates, this is very much one that I know is on the radar, is the need to transition to EV. As things stand, EV charging on housing estates is almost impossible for many residents, without driveways, there is no way to install Homecharge. Charging cables trailing across pavement are serious safety concern, for wheelchair users and families alike. We have been leading the way in installing and stretch in car parks and there is good coverage for those who need to charge.

But there is a challenge here, it can't be right that households with a driveway are more likely to be affluent already and access cheaper and easier EV charging at home without paying with households without a driveway struggling to access and having to pay out charging stations. It is a national challenge. It is a critical barrier to equitable access to EVs, particularly for those living in old

**** Possible New Speaker ****

estates. I thank the other member for giving way and releasing these giving way and releasing these issues that I know -- raising these important issues. In Ealing, electric vehicle charging points has been a major concern for the council to ensure they meet the need and to ensure they meet the need and there are currently 900 electric vehicle charging points throughout the borough, but we need 1,800 by the borough, but we need 1,800 by 2030. The council has just been consulting on an electric vehicle rollout strategy.

In order to take a rollout strategy. In order to take a strategic approach to the issue. Does he agree that other areas would benefit from taking a similar

**** Possible New Speaker ****

strategic approach. Absolutely, once again goes to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely, once again goes to the point of local solutions being important. What I would say, I want to thank the government for their work on reforms set out by the National Energy System Operator to improve the speed at which EV charging infrastructure can be on the grid. I will press on because I am conscious... I am fast approaching the witching hour. There is another technical but issue I would like to raise, one that makes it harder for the authorities to introduce parking restrictions.

Even simple localised restrictions can cost up to £1000 in advertising fees because of the requirement to publicise them under the Road traffic regulation act. In a local newspaper. That is money knocked going to tarmac or signage but advertising costs. Residents can wait for months for a minor change that can include safety and that can include safety and accessibility. Finally, I want to touch on pavement parking, which I know is a divisive subject, many members have argued it should be illegal to park on pavements, I understand why they hold such a view.

I recognise how difficult it is for people with pushchairs and disabled people, especially blind people, to navigate pavements. I have met and heard from a fantastic charity on this issue. The reality is, if you enforce a total ban, in Bracknell Forest, there would be nowhere to park. Many narrow estate, pavement parking is the only way the road can remain possible. I would support giving local authorities the power to decide where to ban pavement parking based on local needs.

Again, it is about local flexibility, councils know the community best, communities know what is best for them and let's trust them to make the right calls and empower them to tackle this significant issue. Facing so many families in Bracknell Forest and across the country.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, and can I thank my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, and can I thank my honourable friend for raising this important matter today, I
19:21
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
important matter today, I congratulate him on securing this important debate, I have heard his concerns regarding the inadequate provision of parking across his constituency, and I recognise the issues he raises, the accessibility of parking, these are important issues directly linked to the welfare of local communities and the economic prosperity is of pounds. Let me cover the main points raised in his remarks and other interventions. As my honourable friend will be aware, competition for parking spaces, especially accessible street parking, is substantial.

The government recognises the provision of accessible and reliable parking, it is important outside much potent areas where public consultation is often limited and people need to drive to access basic services. Whilst the government understands the benefits of private car use up and down the country, in many of relying on private vehicles, I recognise many estates are not equipped to deal with the numbers of cars we now have on our roads, this is felt by residents in old estates.

This has been exacerbated by the fact that modern cars have not only grown in number but in size. As a result, the growing demand for the provision of parking becomes unmanageable. This will not only be frustrating to residents who own vehicles but can lead to dangerous parking in private areas. My department is aware of the complaints residents have raised about parked vehicles preventing the flow of traffic, and I welcome the measures the council have put in place to prevent this.

Whilst this government recognises the importance of adequate provision of street parking, in line with the government position on this, parking is the responsibility of local authorities and it is for them to determine what is appropriate local authorities ready have powers to implement parking restrictions, it is the governance understanding the Bracknell Forest Council has acknowledged the pressures in the community and are in the process of incrementing a parking strategy with the objective to support provision of parking. I note the concerns raised regarding the progress to date.

It is right that they have autonomy in their area. As he recognised, when he spoke about local solutions, local authorities are best placed to balance the needs of everyone in the community. Of course, the government is committed to investing in local communities and improving local transport and structure, the Department for Transport allocated £203,000 to Bracknell Forest Council from the local transport resource funding scheme, under the scheme, local transport authorities can use the funding to build their capability and capacity and develop ambitious schemes.

And update Local Transport Plan's, deliver local delivery plans, fund individual products and retain the transport expertise to do so. When it comes to pavement parking, I understand that this can be a real problem for pedestrians, wheelchair users, those with prams, buggies, and those with mobility or visual impairment. We are mindful of the concerns many have raised about inconsiderate parking... Pavement inconsiderate parking... Pavement parking. As my honourable friend is likely aware, the Department for Transport held a consultation in 2020 on the complex problem of pavement parking, this gunman intends to publish a formal response later this year which will summarise the views received and announced the next step for pavement parking.

In the meantime, highways authorities might introduce specific local restrictions using existing powers and these can be enforced by councils using civil parking enforcement powers. My honourable friend also raised the topic of electric vehicle on housing estate with retired parking. The government is committed to making EV infrastructure more affordable and accessible, particularly for those without offstreet parking. Most electric vehicle drivers charge overnight at home, the most convenient and cost-effective. The support those without offstreet parking, the government offers a grant for homes to purchase a charge point.

The tournament is aware of at least 26 trials and hundreds of individuals across pavement solutions across the UK. The government is working with local authorities to encourage this technology, in December 2024, the government published cross pavement guidance to help local authorities understand what we need to consider for the roll-out of cross pavement solutions. This includes relevant planning permissions, minimum existing standards, response booties and case studies. For private land, such as the residential estates, my honourable friend mentioned, landowners or private car park operators are responsible for parking provision and enforcement, I'm pleased to have the Bracknell Forest Council is working with local landowners including housing associations to deliver more parking capacity.

Whilst housing associations are private bodies and must make their own decisions on how to run business, the neighbourhood and community standard is clear that providers must cooperate to produce economic well-being, this standard includes a specific expectation that housing associations cooperate with local authorities to support them in achieving their objectives. However, the Regulator of Social Housing does not dictate how individual housing associations demonstrate how they comply with this duty. But I welcome the corporation my honourable friend has mentioned, and that it to see local authorities working collaboratively with the housing association in question and I'm pleased by the commitment through the parking strategy to work with housing associations to help alleviate the pressures on parking.

To conclude, I would like to thank my honourable friend once again for raising this matter with the government today, we recognise the significant concerns many communities, to clearly those residing in old estates, face regarding access ability and available to your parking, this is an essential resource which is under increasing pressure and we support local councillors in their endeavours to mitigate these challenges. They are best positioned because they possess the knowledge of the area and can effectively consider factors such as traffic flow capacity, road safety and the needs of residents.

But I hope I gave my honourable friend sense of what the government is doing to support this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it.
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page